[CS-FSLUG] TD: (Im)morality of (non)free software

[Aaron Lehmann]

On Mon, Feb 28, 2005 at 10:15:19AM +0200, Jukka wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 23:08:25 -0500, Aaron Lehmann
> <lehmanap at lehmanap.dyndns.org> wrote:
> > I've started this thread so that Don can talk about the immorality of
> > closed-source software, and so I can talk about the immorality of the
> > GPL.
> > 
> > The GPL is immoral, because it forces those who extend the author's code
> > to use the GPL (or compatible?) if they decide to release their code.
> > This seems to me to be the height of arrogance.  It is essentially
> > saying, "I wrote the base for your work, so you must not close your
> > extension of it.  Further, you must put the same restrictions on anyone
> > who might extend YOUR code."  I recognize that this protects the
> > so-called rights of users to information, but at the expense of the
> > rights of developers and maintainers to make use of their own labor for
> > their own ends.  It is essentially muzzling the ox as he treads the
> > grain.  It results in people needlessly duplicating code (anathema to
> > developers) so that they won't be bound by a hypocritical and
> > restrictive liscense.  The fruit of my labor is MINE.  If I wish to
> > release it into the common domain, or otherwise allow others to profit
> > from my labor, that is my privelage.  I don't have the right to force
> > others to give away their labor, anymore than anyone has the right to
> > force me to give up mine.
> > 
> > As a user, I have the right to use whatever tool does the job best.  I
> > write code in vim, my window manager is ratpoison, and I do all my
> > chatting through irssi.  This is my choice, but not one I have the right
> > to force on others.  I don't have the right to claim your tools are
> > worse for your use just because they would be worse for mine than my
> > current suite.
> > 
> > Aaron Lehmann
> 
> I think GPL works benefits everyone (except other OS-makers :) in
> operating-system level. I understand why smaller closed
> source-projects may have doubts of their future, but wouldn't the
> situation be the same if FOSS didn't exist and big software companies
> would monopolize everything with their patents/lawsuits/unfair
> competition?
> 
> >From the programmers view, what are the most important reusable
> components that should be non-GPL?

>From mine, all of them.  I'm not opposed to open-source software.  I'm
opposed to the GPL.