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

[Manoj Victor Mathew <mvm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sun, Jan 02, 2000 at 10:22:49PM -0800, Arun Sharma wrote:
> > Availability of closed source enhancements to free software might bring
> > immediate benefits to the average Linux user. But by /not/ allowing
> > closed source enhancements, the average Linux user will benefit much
> > more in the long run.
> 
> And the reason is ?

You develop an enhancement, free or non-free. If the enhancement is
free, I can further extent and enhance it. The result? The average user
get more choice.

But with a non-free enhancement, only you can extent it. But why should
you, when people are willing to pay for the old enhancement? The user
cannot get a extended version, unless you yourself give it to them.

> I claim that commercial software works better if ease of use 
> is the main priority. Free software authors have no 
> incentive to make software easier to use. 

But I love cool graphical interfaces which are easy to use. Who stops me
from giving the program a new face?  ;-)


> The GNU philosophy has clouded the issue by overemphasizing what they
> call freedom. Should I have the freedom to withdraw money from your
> bank account or take stuff away from your home because I like them ?

You take away my TV and I will be left with none. But you copy all my
programs, I still have a copy. Please feel free to copy all my program
;-)


> 
> The ability to read the source code of someone who doesn't want to
> show you the source code is *not* freedom.

Finally we agree ;-)  I cannot force you to write free software. I can
only insist.


> > MS Linux being proprietary, I will not be able to use their ideas.
> 
> Why do you want to use their ideas ? Especially if they don't want
> you to use their ideas ? In my book, that is theft.
> 

I sure would not have made such hue and cry if I wanted to steel MS
Linux code. I can use their ideas only if they make it free. 


> > If source code for MS Linux is not available, and if the software
> > community is not allowed to /use/ the source code, other software will
> > not be able to benefit from it. We will end up reinventing the wheel
> > many times. This 'ultra proprietary MS Linux', will take away my freedom
> > to benefit from the copy of MS Linux, I bought.
> 
> You are forgetting an important distinction here. The one between
> the user and the developer. In the Linux world, they are roughly
> equivalent. In the real world, there is a huge difference. The 
> user doesn't care about freedom to benefit from ideas and such
> abstract concepts.

That's why I feel, intellectual property as such deserves to be free;
free as in the sense of freedom.


> I can see the jealous GNU charging towards Redmond :-) 

Hey jealousy is not a bug. It is an undocumented feature ;-)


> 
> Again, the GNU project has used the word freedom/free in misleading ways.
> 
> Having said that, I do not like the other extreme. All words you've 
> spoken are learnt by hearing someone else speak and hence derived
> works. Imagine the situation of having to pay a royalty to someone
> every time you used the word "foo". Over here in the US, the situation
> is getting dangerously close to this.
> 
> The right balance IMO, is somewhere in between.

Perhaps! Time will tell.


PS. Arun, would you like to have my personal .muttrc? It's free, free in
the sense of freedom. I prefer to distribute my .muttrc for Rs 1000/-,
but as a special offer, I can give it to you for Rs 0!!

-- 
Do you support 'free software'?  Visit http://mvm.linuxbox.com

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