The Republic (was Re: [CS-FSLUG] TD: (Im)morality of (non)free software)
Timothy R. Butler
tbutler at ofb.biz
Mon Feb 28 21:03:07 CST 2005
> I have NOT acknowledged that it actually DOES perpetuate freedom
> though.
> To the contrary. If A writes some software from scratch, he has the
> right to do whatever he wishes with it. He can sell or release it as a
> proprietary package, he can sell or release it as a more open package,
> he can keep it and use it himself. These are his rights. Lets suppose
> he has listened to RMS's hype and he releases it under the GPL. Now
> lets say that developer B gets ahold of the software and improves it.
> He has less rights than A did. He can sell it as an open product or
> release it for free as an open product, or keep it to himself. He
> cannot however, sell it or release it as a proprietary product. The
Basically this is an issue of a republic versus anarchy or even
democracy. Any functional "democratic" government in existence is
really a republic, as I'm sure everyone knows. Now, the founders could
have crafted a "BSD-style" government that allowed anything and
everything. That would be called anarchy. And you can bet it wouldn't
have lasted. Just like a BSD licensed software, soon someone would come
in and make the country proprietary (a dictatorship) or different parts
of the country would split up with incompatible restrictions (perhaps I
couldn't move from my city to the suburb 30 miles away because they
have a restriction that requires one to sell everything and buy new
stuff from them).
A democracy is also a problem since it leads to mob rule. The rule of
law goes out the window because the majority will always oppress the
minority given the chance, carving out exceptions for themselves.
A republican form of government works best for preserving freedom not
because it is the "freest" system but because it will provide the most
freedom. If the United States lasted ten years in anarchy or two and a
quarter centuries in a republic, which system provided the most
freedom? I think it is fair to say, far more people were free under a
republic because it can last. A BSD licensed program, if useful, will
almost certainly start heading toward becoming proprietary at some
point. Therefore, maximal amounts of free users (even less free than
"anarchic freedom") will never be achieved. A GPL'ed program insures
that every single person who ever uses the program will have the rights
the author intended.
-Tim
---------------------------------------------------------------
Timothy R. Butler Universal Networks www.uninet.info
==================== <tbutler at uninet.info> ====================
| Christian Portal: | Have you not learned great lessons |
| www.faithtree.com | from those who braced themselves |
| GNU/Linux News: | against you and disputed the |
| www.ofb.biz | passage with you? --Walt Whitman |
---------------------------------------------------------------
Presently on "Albert" (DP PPC 970 "G5" running at 2.0 GHz)
More information about the Christiansource
mailing list