[CS-FSLUG] Morals of free software - Was: RevolutionOS Movie

[Don Parris]

On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 22:58:11 -0500
Bob Brown <bebrown at gmail.com> wrote:

> I would say that ethical "right" and "wrong" do not truly appear in
> software licenses.
> 

We have to understand that Stallman started the GNU Project out of his moral
convictions.  To ignore that would be like joining a church for the social
connections.  The two primary moral concerns Stallman has are:
(1) The ability to share
(2) The ability to modify your tools

The fact that others either ignore or disagree with his concerns does not
mean they are invalid.  It could just as easily mean that they have
different values.

To force someone else to depend on the developer is a new form of
colonialism (we were once forced to trade through Britain).  To make helping
your neighbor a criminal act is, from my perspective, an even bigger crime. 
Thus Jesus healed people on the Sabbath, despite the fact that so many (at
least the leadership) objected.  From a user standpoint, Jephthah made a
foolish pledge.  It cost him his daughter's life.  So, too, when I agree to
not share with my neighbor, I'm putting myself in a bind.

> Licenses can grant or restrict freedoms, but in the end you decide
> whether or not the software is worth the licensing. If the software
> provides something wonderful, but restricts your usage in a minor way
> then it evaluates as good for you.
> However, the worst software on the face of the earth cannot be
> redeemed simply because you like the freedom in the license.
> 
I think we're looking at things from a very different perspective.  People
are trying to force a round peg (non-physical material) into a square hole
(physical material).  We're trying to sell software as if it were hardware,
which it isn't.   If we have to build on a model that makes helping others a
criminal act, then maybe we need a new model (or an old one that got thrown
away).

The quality of much proprietary software, Windows for one, leaves much to be
desired.  But the freedom to modify my tools, makes the poor quality, free
program a much better alternative.  At least I have the ability to improve
it, whereas I am dependent on someone else for the other.  If a proprietary
company sinks, then I get left holding the bag.  With FOSS, I or someone
else can take up the development.  That may or may not happen with
proprietary software.


> Licensing choice is not a pure ethics based decision on the part of
> the user, unless you are some sort of fundamentalist with serious
> issues, it is a decision of what works for you.
> 
Although I've never fit the fundamentalist mold, apparently, refusing to
agree to not help my neighbor makes me a fundamentalist.  
<clowning around>
So let it be written, so let it be done.  I, Don Parris, do hereby confess I
am a fundamentalist.  Now, I'll go out and thump my bible.  Yeah right.
</clowning around>

> As a minister, first and foremost, I do consider morals and Chrsitian
> ethics in my decisions. I'm not always good at it, but I try to
> consider everything in that light.
> 
Life is a learning experience.  We all have to grow.  That's cool.

> I appreciate free software, both gratis and libre, but it is not the
> core of my beliefs. I would give up both for the sake of my ministry
> if it was necessary. Yes, that sounds like a silly choice to have to
> make and I doubt it would occur, but that is the order of my
> priorities in action. I have no doubts that anyone here serious about
> their Christian service would make the same decision.
> 
Loving God and our neighbors should be at the core of our beliefs.  Thus,
when someone asks me to not share with my neighbor, I cannot think of a
reason to make such an agreement.  Assuming I am not hiding a criminal,
which would surely dishonor the Lord, I am obliged by the Law of Love
(Christ's love) to help my neighbor.

> I know very little about Stallman, but the little I know puts me off
> from wanting to be in too close of an association with him and some of
> his ideas. I think he is bigoted and offensive to many ideals I hold,
> but most people will acknowledge that and leave him be.
> 
I was unaware of his bigotry.  Still, I always find it best to cross beyond
my comfort zone to try and understand others.  After all, it was our Savior
who passed through the land of the Samaritans.  The only way for me to
understand him is to be willing to get to know him - even if I am a bit
uncomfortable with his devout atheism.  You should at least read through his
material.  That's at least a start.

> That really is a moral decision I had to make when it arose and I
> consider that issue to be far more important than a few words inside
> of a software license that say you cannot use it just any way you
> please.
> 
What issue, Stallman's bigotry?  As for the words in a software license,
they grant or deny the freedom to use, share, and modify software. This is
America.  In America, we are free to do pretty much what we please,
including gambling, drinking, smoking, having abortions, getting divorced,
etc.  In some states, prostitution is legal.  None of these are necessarily
moral acts, but we are free to do them.  I can make sharing a criminal act
(even though it is morally good), merely by issuing a license with words to
that effect, and very few Christians even bat an eye???

Seems like an upside down world to me.

> I am not saying that anyone who connects themselves with him is a bad
> person. He is not the definition of evil any more than Microsoft is
> (that statement will bug someone, I just know it). But I fell as
> comfortable with him as he would probably feel sitting in a pew in
> front of me when I preach this Sunday.
> note: this will be my last Sunday preaching. After this I am heading
> over for my new job with computers and security systems at my home
> church :) yay
> 
> 

That's a good thing.  I don't think people who buy software from a company
that has a proven track record of un-Christian business ethics are bad
people.  I just assume they don't know who they're doing business with.  And
there are some very staunch Christians working in proprietary companies like
Microsoft- my brother is one of them.  While I really wish he didn't work
there, he does.

Well, if you'd rather be doing that than preaching, I'm glad for you.

Blessings,
Don
-- 
evangelinux    GNU Evangelist
http://matheteuo.org/                   http://chaddb.sourceforge.net/
"Free software is like God's love - you can share it with anyone anytime
anywhere."