[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Subject Index][Thread Index]

Re: [LI] Re: DVD-ROM on Linux?



On Tue, Dec 28, 1999 at 02:10:47PM +0518, Manoj Victor Mathew wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 19, 1999 at 11:22:33AM -0800, Arun Sharma wrote:
> > The technology is controlled by the movie
> > and the media industry. Their livelihood depends on being able to sell
> > content in a controlled way - very similar to the way Bill Gates sells
> > software for money
> 
> Well it is like saying "Bidis should not be banned because many
> bidi makers, make a livelihood out of it." 
>

Sure. The only problem is that there is no "should" in my mail. It was
not an attempt to define how DVD technology should be controlled. I was
just stating a fact - that the content providers control the technology.
And my opinion is that it is not easy to make them produce content in
a medium that can be easily reproduced legally. 
 
> Have you read through the EULA in Win95? Is it not a bag of
> restrictions? Are they not dictating what I am supposed to do with my
> hardware? How can I trust my hardware to them?

I'm not defending the Win95 EULA or MS's licensing policies here. But I
do defend their or anyone else's right to sell software for money.

If you do not like to use Win95 - you now have many alternative OSes,
which are free both in the beer and speech sense - the most significant
ones that come to mind are Linux and FreeBSD.

> 
> > - also something that is opposed tooth and nail by the GNU project.
> 
> That is exactly why I like the GNU project. It ensures freedom.
> 

That's a political statement and I have an opinion just like you do.
I'd compare that to a situation where a political party makes an 
election promise that everyone will be free to copy all music at
the cost of the media and there by ensure the freedom to hear music
and create more music by modifying existing music.

Fundamentally, I don't agree with the GNU way of "ensuring" freedom.

> 
> > (b) Stop calling LGPL lesser GPL and stop asking library authors to
> >     GPL their libraries to prevent commercial software from being 
> >     ported to Linux. Even LGPL has elements which prevent commercial
> >     software from using the libraries in question - but it is far more
> >     benign compared to GPL.
> > 
> 
> If I do not encourage the use of GPL, then who will? Who will bring
> about the GNU revolution?

I maintain that there is no talk of the "revolution" outside the GNU
project. It's all about convenience. I write software to scratch my
favorite itch and give it away and benefit from others who do the same.

> LGPL is there because it can hasten the GNU revolution. IMHO there
> will be no LGPL in future, because all software will be GPLed.

"will be" ? You can be sure that some software, however insignificant
it may be, produced by me will not be GPL'ed.

> 
> 
> > (c) Give up on the *all* software should be free ideology.   
> > 
> 
> Never! That's what GNU revolution is all about. Unless all software is
> 'free software', GPL software authors cannot survive. On the other

I can use your beedi argument here. Why is the survival of the GNU
project a goal ? My goal is to have usable free software - not the
survival of the GNU project.

Even if that was a goal, would you care to elaborate, why GNU software
authors can't survive if the world is not GPL'ed ? IMO, any 
movement/religion/revolution is flawed, if it seeks to
assimilate every other form of diversity on the planet.

Some unwanted advice: authors of GNU software have better chances of
survival, if they released software under the BSD license, because
they can sell closed source modifications for money. I do realize that
the short term reality is different, but I believe that things will be
different, once the irrational Wall street Linux mania subsides.

> hand, if all software is 'free software' everybody can survive.

I'm the co-author of some commercial software. Why doesn't your "everybody" 
include me ?

> Speaking about Winmodems, all these problems would not have existed if
> Winmodems followed concepts that make up the 'free software' concept.

Yes, deers could escape the leopards if they could fly.

> Manoj Victor Mathew  (GPG#: 3D96A9B9)
> Cochin, India.

I can't help noticing that you are the second guy from Kerala, one of
the two communist states in India, who is talking about the GNU 
"revolution".

To summarize, if you're an average free software user in India, chances
are that you're using Linux and a significant portion of the software
you use is from the GNU project and comes with a flashy manifesto that
is very appealing. But what you may (at least I did) miss is that there
is a large number of free software authors who don't care about the
"revolution" and who are not as vocal as the GNU project in pushing
their beliefs. The GNU project is a significant part of the much larger
set of free software authors. But often, the two are equated incorrectly.

My general experience of the free software culture is that competence
is respected. If you write good software, you get respect. It doesn't
matter if you GPL it, BSD it or sell it for money by working for
Microsoft.

	-Arun