[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[GNUnet-SVN] [taler-merchant-frontends] 01/02: pretty-print articles and
|
From: |
gnunet |
|
Subject: |
[GNUnet-SVN] [taler-merchant-frontends] 01/02: pretty-print articles and remove outer layers and layout |
|
Date: |
Mon, 13 Feb 2017 11:25:38 +0100 |
This is an automated email from the git hooks/post-receive script.
dold pushed a commit to branch master
in repository merchant-frontends.
commit 373a57bc81351f0ec7562f677f80ffe3f5060488
Author: Florian Dold <address@hidden>
AuthorDate: Mon Feb 13 11:07:26 2017 +0100
pretty-print articles and remove outer layers and layout
---
talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_1.html | 355 +++--
talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_10.html | 265 ++--
talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_11.html | 73 +-
talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_12.html | 319 ++--
talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_13.html | 721 +++++----
talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_14.html | 554 ++++---
talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_15.html | 181 +--
talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_16.html | 1098 +++++++++-----
talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_17.html | 511 ++++---
talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_18.html | 956 +++++++-----
talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_19.html | 118 +-
talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_2.html | 2096 ++++++++++++++++----------
talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_20.html | 415 +++--
talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_21.html | 215 +--
talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_22.html | 262 ++--
talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_23.html | 385 +++--
talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_24.html | 326 ++--
talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_25.html | 1041 ++++++++-----
talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_26.html | 238 +--
talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_27.html | 389 +++--
talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_28.html | 815 ++++++----
talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_29.html | 256 ++--
talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_3.html | 321 ++--
talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_30.html | 286 ++--
talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_31.html | 593 +++++---
talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_32.html | 316 ++--
talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_33.html | 610 +++++---
talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_34.html | 283 ++--
talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_35.html | 316 ++--
talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_36.html | 230 +--
talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_37.html | 330 ++--
talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_38.html | 324 ++--
talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_39.html | 143 +-
talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_4.html | 1070 ++++++++-----
talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_40.html | 302 ++--
talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_41.html | 250 +--
talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_42.html | 91 +-
talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_43.html | 181 ++-
talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_46.html | 285 +++-
talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_47.html | 269 +++-
talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_5.html | 531 ++++---
talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_6.html | 1220 +++++++++------
talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_7.html | 167 +-
talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_8.html | 202 +--
talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_9.html | 186 +--
talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_U.0.html | 202 +--
talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_U.1.html | 80 +-
47 files changed, 12336 insertions(+), 8041 deletions(-)
diff --git a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_1.html
b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_1.html
index 5fce2d6..2d8c5fe 100644
--- a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_1.html
+++ b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_1.html
@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
-<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/loose.dtd";>
-<html><!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
+<!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
Free Software Foundation
@@ -19,94 +18,95 @@ ISBN 978-0-9831592-0-9
Cover design by Rob Myers.
Cover photograph by Peter Hinely.
- --><!-- Created on February 18, 2016 by texi2html 1.82
-texi2html was written by:
- Lionel Cons <address@hidden> (original author)
- Karl Berry <address@hidden>
- Olaf Bachmann <address@hidden>
- and many others.
-Maintained by: Many creative people.
-Send bugs and suggestions to <address@hidden>
---><head><title>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 1. The Free Software
Definition</title><meta name="description" content="This is the second edition
of Richard Stallman's collection of essays."><meta name="keywords"
content="Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 1. The Free Software
Definition"><meta name="resource-type" content="document"><meta
name="distribution" content="global"><meta name="Generator" content="texi2html
1.82"><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; ch [...]
-<!--
-a.summary-letter {text-decoration: none}
-blockquote.smallquotation {font-size: smaller}
-pre.display {font-family: serif}
-pre.format {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-comment {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-preformatted {font-family: serif}
-pre.smalldisplay {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallexample {font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallformat {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smalllisp {font-size: smaller}
-span.roman {font-family:serif; font-weight:normal;}
-span.sansserif {font-family:sans-serif; font-weight:normal;}
-ul.toc {list-style: none}
--->
-</style><link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
href="../static/web-common/style.css"></head><body lang="en" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
text="#000000" link="#0000FF" vlink="#800080" alink="#FF0000" class="article">
+ -->
-<a name="Definition"></a>
-<header><div id="logo"><a href="/"><img src="../static/gnu.svg" height="100"
width="100"></a></div><h1 class="book-title">Free Software, Free Society, 2nd
ed.</h1></header><section id="main"><a name="The-Free-Software-Definition"></a>
-<h1 class="chapter"> 1. The Free Software Definition </h1>
-
-<a
name="index-free-software-_0028see-also-free-software_002c-four-freedoms_002c-citizen-values_002c-selling_002c-and-software_0029"></a>
-<p>We maintain this free software definition to show clearly what must be
+<section id="main">
+ <a name="The-Free-Software-Definition">
+ </a>
+ <h1 class="chapter">
+ 1. The Free Software Definition
+ </h1>
+ <a
name="index-free-software-_0028see-also-free-software_002c-four-freedoms_002c-citizen-values_002c-selling_002c-and-software_0029">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ We maintain this free software definition to show clearly what must be
true about a particular software program for it to be considered free
software. From time to time we revise this definition to clarify it.
If you would like to review the changes we’ve made, please see the
History section, following the definition, at
-<a
href="http://gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html";>http://gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html</a>.
-</p>
-<p>“Free software” is a matter of liberty, not price. To understand
+ <a href="http://gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html";>
+ http://gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html
+ </a>
+ .
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ “Free software” is a matter of liberty, not price. To understand
the concept, you should think of “free” as in “free speech,”
not as in “free beer.”
-</p>
-<a name="index-free-software_002c-four-freedoms"></a>
-<a name="index-four-freedoms"></a>
-<p>Free software is a matter of the users’ freedom to run, copy, distribute,
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-free-software_002c-four-freedoms">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-four-freedoms">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Free software is a matter of the users’ freedom to run, copy, distribute,
study, change and improve the software. More precisely, it means that the
program’s users have the four essential freedoms:
-</p>
-<ul><li>
-The freedom to run the program, for any purpose (freedom 0).
-
-</li><li>
-The freedom to study how the program works, and change it to make it
+ </p>
+ <ul>
+ <li>
+ The freedom to run the program, for any purpose (freedom 0).
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ The freedom to study how the program works, and change it to make it
do what you wish (freedom 1). Access to the source code is a
precondition for this.
-
-</li><li>
-The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor
(freedom 2).
-
-</li><li>
-The freedom to distribute copies of your modified versions to others
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ The freedom to distribute copies of your modified versions to others
(freedom 3). By doing this you can give the whole community a chance
to benefit from your changes. Access to the source code is a
precondition for this.
-
-</li></ul><p>A program is free software if users have all of these freedoms.
Thus,
+ </li>
+ </ul>
+ <p>
+ A program is free software if users have all of these freedoms. Thus,
you should be free to redistribute copies, either with or without
modifications, either gratis or charging a fee for distribution, to
anyone anywhere. Being free to do these things means (among other
things) that you do not have to ask or pay for permission to do so.
-</p>
-<p>You should also have the freedom to make modifications and use them
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ You should also have the freedom to make modifications and use them
privately in your own work or play, without even mentioning that they
exist. If you do publish your changes, you should not be required to
notify anyone in particular, or in any particular way.
-</p>
-<p>The freedom to run the program means the freedom for any kind of
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The freedom to run the program means the freedom for any kind of
person or organization to use it on any kind of computer system, for
any kind of overall job and purpose, without being required to
communicate about it with the developer or any other specific
-entity. In this freedom, it is the <em>user’s</em> purpose that matters,
-not the <em>developer’s</em> purpose; you as a user are free to run the
+entity. In this freedom, it is the
+ <em>
+ user’s
+ </em>
+ purpose that matters,
+not the
+ <em>
+ developer’s
+ </em>
+ purpose; you as a user are free to run the
program for your purposes, and if you distribute it to someone else,
she is then free to run it for her purposes, but you are not entitled
to impose your purposes on her.
-</p>
-<p>The freedom to redistribute copies must include binary or executable
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The freedom to redistribute copies must include binary or executable
forms of the program, as well as source code, for both modified and
unmodified versions. (Distributing programs in runnable form is necessary
for conveniently installable free operating systems.) It is OK if there
@@ -114,58 +114,71 @@ is no way to produce a binary or executable form for a
certain program
(since some languages don’t support that feature), but you must have the
freedom to redistribute such forms should you find or develop a way to
make them.
-</p>
-<p>In order for freedoms 1 and 3 (the freedom to make changes
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ In order for freedoms 1 and 3 (the freedom to make changes
and the freedom to publish improved versions) to be meaningful, you
must have access to the source code of the program. Therefore,
accessibility of source code is a necessary condition for free
software. Obfuscated “source code” is not real source code and does
not count as source code.
-</p>
-<p>Freedom 1 includes the freedom to use your changed version in
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Freedom 1 includes the freedom to use your changed version in
place of the original. If the program is delivered in a product
designed to run someone else’s modified versions but refuse to run
yours—a practice known as
-<a name="index-tivoization"></a>
-“tivoization” or (in its practitioners’
-perverse terminology) as
-<a name="index-secure-boot-_0028see-also-tivoization_0029"></a>
-“secure boot”—freedom 1 becomes a theoretical fiction rather
+ <a name="index-tivoization">
+ </a>
+ “tivoization” or (in its practitioners’
+perverse terminology) as
+ <a name="index-secure-boot-_0028see-also-tivoization_0029">
+ </a>
+ “secure boot”—freedom 1 becomes a theoretical fiction rather
than a practical freedom. This is not sufficient. In other words,
these binaries are not free software even if the source code they are
compiled from is free.
-</p>
-<p>One important way to modify a program is by merging in available free
-subroutines and modules.
-<a name="index-copyright-_0028see-also-both-copyleft-and-DMCA_0029"></a>
-If the program’s license says that you cannot merge in a suitably
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ One important way to modify a program is by merging in available free
+subroutines and modules.
+ <a name="index-copyright-_0028see-also-both-copyleft-and-DMCA_0029">
+ </a>
+ If the program’s license says that you cannot merge in a suitably
licensed existing module—for instance, if it requires you to be the
copyright holder of any code you add—then the license is too
restrictive to qualify as free.
-</p>
-<a name="index-copyleft-_0028see-also-copyright_0029-1"></a>
-<p>Freedom 3 includes the freedom to release your modified versions
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-copyleft-_0028see-also-copyright_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Freedom 3 includes the freedom to release your modified versions
as free software. A free license may also permit other ways of
releasing them; in other words, it does not have to be a copyleft
license. However, a license that requires modified versions to be
nonfree does not qualify as a free license.
-</p>
-<p>In order for these freedoms to be real, they must be permanent and
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ In order for these freedoms to be real, they must be permanent and
irrevocable as long as you do nothing wrong; if the developer of the
software has the power to revoke the license, or retroactively change
its terms, without your doing anything wrong to give cause, the
software is not free.
-</p>
-<p>However, certain kinds of rules about the manner of distributing free
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ However, certain kinds of rules about the manner of distributing free
software are acceptable, when they don’t conflict with the central
freedoms. For example, copyleft (very simply stated) is the rule that
when redistributing the program, you cannot add restrictions to deny
other people the central freedoms. This rule does not conflict with
the central freedoms; rather it protects them.
-</p>
-<a name="index-commercial-use-and-development"></a>
-<a
name="index-free-software_002c-to-be-distinguished-from-noncommercial-software"></a>
-<p>“Free software” does not mean “noncommercial.” A free program must
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-commercial-use-and-development">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-free-software_002c-to-be-distinguished-from-noncommercial-software">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ “Free software” does not mean “noncommercial.” A free program must
be available for commercial use, commercial development, and
commercial distribution. Commercial development of free software is no
longer unusual; such free commercial software is very important. You
@@ -173,12 +186,14 @@ may have paid money to get copies of free software, or
you may have
obtained copies at no charge. But regardless of how you got your
copies, you always have the freedom to copy and change the software,
even to sell copies.
-</p>
-<p>Whether a change constitutes an improvement is a subjective matter.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Whether a change constitutes an improvement is a subjective matter.
If your modifications are limited, in substance, to changes that
someone else considers an improvement, that is not freedom.
-</p>
-<p>However, rules about how to package a modified version are acceptable,
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ However, rules about how to package a modified version are acceptable,
if they don’t substantively limit your freedom to release modified
versions, or your freedom to make and use modified versions privately.
Thus, it is acceptable for the license to require that you change the
@@ -187,8 +202,9 @@ modifications as yours. As long as these requirements are
not so
burdensome that they effectively hamper you from releasing your
changes, they are acceptable; you’re already making other changes to
the program, so you won’t have trouble making a few more.
-</p>
-<p>Rules that “if you make your version available in this way, you must
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Rules that “if you make your version available in this way, you must
make it available in that way also” can be acceptable too, on the
same condition. An example of such an acceptable rule is one saying
that if you have distributed a modified version and a previous
@@ -196,21 +212,26 @@ developer asks for a copy of it, you must send one.
(Note that such a
rule still leaves you the choice of whether to distribute your version
at all.) Rules that require release of source code to the users for
versions that you put into public use are also acceptable.
-</p>
-<p>In the GNU Project, we use copyleft to protect these freedoms legally
-for everyone. But
-<a name="index-noncopylefted-free-software-_0028see-also-software_0029"></a>
-noncopylefted free software also exists. We believe there are
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ In the GNU Project, we use copyleft to protect these freedoms legally
+for everyone. But
+ <a name="index-noncopylefted-free-software-_0028see-also-software_0029">
+ </a>
+ noncopylefted free software also exists. We believe there are
important reasons why it is better to use copyleft, but if your
program is noncopylefted free software, it is still basically
ethical. (See “Categories of Free and Nonfree Software”
(address@hidden) for a description of how “free software,”
“copylefted software” and other categories of software relate to
each other.)
-<a name="index-copyleft-_0028see-also-copyright_0029-2"></a>
-</p>
-<a name="index-free-software_002c-and-export-control-regulations"></a>
-<p>Sometimes government export control regulations and trade sanctions
+ <a name="index-copyleft-_0028see-also-copyright_0029-2">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-free-software_002c-and-export-control-regulations">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Sometimes government export control regulations and trade sanctions
can constrain your freedom to distribute copies of programs
internationally. Software developers do not have the power to
eliminate or override these restrictions, but what they can and must
@@ -219,9 +240,11 @@ this way, the restrictions will not affect activities and
people
outside the jurisdictions of these governments. Thus, free software
licenses must not require obedience to any export regulations as a
condition of any of the essential freedoms.
-</p>
-<a name="index-copyright-_0028see-also-both-copyleft-and-DMCA_0029-1"></a>
-<p>Most free software licenses are based on copyright, and there are limits
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-copyright-_0028see-also-both-copyleft-and-DMCA_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Most free software licenses are based on copyright, and there are limits
on what kinds of requirements can be imposed through copyright. If a
copyright-based license respects freedom in the ways described above, it
is unlikely to have some other sort of problem that we never anticipated
@@ -229,24 +252,29 @@ is unlikely to have some other sort of problem that we
never anticipated
licenses are based on contracts, and contracts can impose a much larger
range of possible restrictions. That means there are many possible ways
such a license could be unacceptably restrictive and nonfree.
-</p>
-<p>We can’t possibly list all the ways that might happen. If a
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ We can’t possibly list all the ways that might happen. If a
contract-based license restricts the user in an unusual way that
copyright-based licenses cannot, and which isn’t mentioned here as
legitimate, we will have to think about it, and we will probably conclude
it is nonfree.
-</p>
-<a
name="index-call-to-action_002c-use-correct-terminology-_0028see-also-terminology_0029"></a>
-<a name="index-_0060_0060piracy_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term"></a>
-<p>When talking about free software, it is best to avoid using terms like
+ </p>
+ <a
name="index-call-to-action_002c-use-correct-terminology-_0028see-also-terminology_0029">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-_0060_0060piracy_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ When talking about free software, it is best to avoid using terms like
“give away” or “for free,” because those terms imply that the
issue is about price, not freedom. Some common terms such as
“piracy” embody opinions we hope you won’t endorse. See “Words to
Avoid (or Use with Care)” (address@hidden to Avoid-pg}{) for a discussion
of these terms. We also have a list of proper translations of “free
software” into various languages (address@hidden Translations-pg}{).
-</p>
-<p>Finally, note that criteria such as those stated in this free software
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Finally, note that criteria such as those stated in this free software
definition require careful thought for their interpretation. To decide
whether a specific software license qualifies as a free software license,
we judge it based on these criteria to determine whether it fits their
@@ -257,44 +285,85 @@ that calls for extensive thought, including discussions
with a lawyer,
before we can decide if the requirement is acceptable. When we reach
a conclusion about a new issue, we often update these criteria to make
it easier to see why certain licenses do or don’t qualify.
-</p>
-<p>If you are interested in whether a specific license qualifies as a
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ If you are interested in whether a specific license qualifies as a
free software license, see our list of licenses, at
-<a
href="http://gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html";>http://gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html</a>.
If the
+ <a href="http://gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html";>
+ http://gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html
+ </a>
+ . If the
license you are concerned with is not listed there, you can ask us
-about it by sending us email at <a
href="mailto:address@hidden";>address@hidden</a>.
-</p>
-<p>If you are contemplating writing a new license, please contact the
+about it by sending us email at
+ <a href="mailto:address@hidden";>
+ address@hidden
+ </a>
+ .
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ If you are contemplating writing a new license, please contact the
Free Software Foundation first by writing to that address. The
proliferation of different free software licenses means increased work
for users in understanding the licenses; we may be able to help you
find an existing free software license that meets your needs.
-</p>
-<p>If that isn’t possible, if you really need a new license, with our
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ If that isn’t possible, if you really need a new license, with our
help you can ensure that the license really is a free software license
and avoid various practical problems.
-</p>
-<a name="Beyond-Software"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Beyond Software </h3>
-
-<a
name="index-manuals-_0028see-also-manuals_002c-FDL_002c-and-documentation_0029"></a>
-<p>Software manuals must be free, for the same reasons that software
+ </p>
+ <a name="Beyond-Software">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Beyond Software
+ </h3>
+ <a
name="index-manuals-_0028see-also-manuals_002c-FDL_002c-and-documentation_0029">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Software manuals must be free, for the same reasons that software
must be free, and because the manuals are in effect part of the
software.
-</p>
-<p>The same arguments also make sense for other kinds of works of
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The same arguments also make sense for other kinds of works of
practical use—that is to say, works that embody useful knowledge,
-such as educational works and reference works.
-<a name="index-Wikipedia"></a>
-Wikipedia is the best-known example.
-</p>
-<p>Any kind of work <em>can</em> be free, and the definition of free software
-has been extended to a definition of free cultural works<a name="DOCF1"
href="#FOOT1">(1)</a> applicable to any kind of works.
-<a
name="index-free-software-_0028see-also-free-software_002c-four-freedoms_002c-citizen-values_002c-selling_002c-and-software_0029-1"></a>
-</p>
-<div class="footnote">
-<hr><h3>Footnotes</h3>
-<h3><a name="FOOT1" href="#DOCF1">(1)</a></h3>
-<p>See <a href="http://freedomdefined.org";>http://freedomdefined.org</a>.
-</p></div>
-<hr size="2"></section></body></html>
+such as educational works and reference works.
+ <a name="index-Wikipedia">
+ </a>
+ Wikipedia is the best-known example.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Any kind of work
+ <em>
+ can
+ </em>
+ be free, and the definition of free software
+has been extended to a definition of free cultural works
+ <a href="#FOOT1" name="DOCF1">
+ (1)
+ </a>
+ applicable to any kind of works.
+ <a
name="index-free-software-_0028see-also-free-software_002c-four-freedoms_002c-citizen-values_002c-selling_002c-and-software_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <div class="footnote">
+ <hr>
+ <h3>
+ Footnotes
+ </h3>
+ <h3>
+ <a href="#DOCF1" name="FOOT1">
+ (1)
+ </a>
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ See
+ <a href="http://freedomdefined.org";>
+ http://freedomdefined.org
+ </a>
+ .
+ </p>
+ </hr>
+ </div>
+ <hr size="2"/>
+</section>
diff --git a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_10.html
b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_10.html
index 45080a7..73c7100 100644
--- a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_10.html
+++ b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_10.html
@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
-<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/loose.dtd";>
-<html><!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
+<!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
Free Software Foundation
@@ -19,167 +18,204 @@ ISBN 978-0-9831592-0-9
Cover design by Rob Myers.
Cover photograph by Peter Hinely.
- --><!-- Created on February 18, 2016 by texi2html 1.82
-texi2html was written by:
- Lionel Cons <address@hidden> (original author)
- Karl Berry <address@hidden>
- Olaf Bachmann <address@hidden>
- and many others.
-Maintained by: Many creative people.
-Send bugs and suggestions to <address@hidden>
---><head><title>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 10. Selling Free
Software</title><meta name="description" content="This is the second edition of
Richard Stallman's collection of essays."><meta name="keywords" content="Free
Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 10. Selling Free Software"><meta
name="resource-type" content="document"><meta name="distribution"
content="global"><meta name="Generator" content="texi2html 1.82"><meta
http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" [...]
-<!--
-a.summary-letter {text-decoration: none}
-blockquote.smallquotation {font-size: smaller}
-pre.display {font-family: serif}
-pre.format {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-comment {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-preformatted {font-family: serif}
-pre.smalldisplay {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallexample {font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallformat {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smalllisp {font-size: smaller}
-span.roman {font-family:serif; font-weight:normal;}
-span.sansserif {font-family:sans-serif; font-weight:normal;}
-ul.toc {list-style: none}
--->
-</style><link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
href="../static/web-common/style.css"></head><body lang="en" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
text="#000000" link="#0000FF" vlink="#800080" alink="#FF0000" class="article">
+ -->
-<a name="Selling"></a>
-<header><div id="logo"><a href="/"><img src="../static/gnu.svg" height="100"
width="100"></a></div><h1 class="book-title">Free Software, Free Society, 2nd
ed.</h1></header><section id="main"><a name="Selling-Free-Software"></a>
-<h1 class="chapter"> 10. Selling Free Software </h1>
-
-<a name="index-selling_002c-free-software-2"></a>
-<p>Many people believe that the spirit of the
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Project-4"></a>
-GNU Project is that you
+<section id="main">
+ <a name="Selling-Free-Software">
+ </a>
+ <h1 class="chapter">
+ 10. Selling Free Software
+ </h1>
+ <a name="index-selling_002c-free-software-2">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Many people believe that the spirit of the
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Project-4">
+ </a>
+ GNU Project is that you
should not charge money for distributing copies of software, or that
you should charge as little as possible—just enough to cover
the cost. This is a misunderstanding.
-</p>
-<p>Actually, we encourage people who redistribute free software
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Actually, we encourage people who redistribute free software
to charge as much as they wish or can. If this seems surprising to
you, please read on.
-</p>
-<p>The word “free” has two legitimate general meanings; it can refer
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The word “free” has two legitimate general meanings; it can refer
either to freedom or to price. When we speak of “free software,”
we’re talking about freedom, not price. (Think of “free speech,”
not “free beer.”) Specifically, it means that a user is free to run
the program, change the program, and redistribute the program with or
without changes.
-</p>
-<p>Free programs are sometimes distributed gratis, and sometimes for a
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Free programs are sometimes distributed gratis, and sometimes for a
substantial price. Often the same program is available in both ways
from different places. The program is free regardless of the price,
because users have freedom in using it.
-</p>
-<p>Nonfree programs are usually sold for a high price, but sometimes a store
will give you a copy at no charge. That doesn’t make it free software, though.
Price or no price, the program is nonfree because users don’t have freedom.
-</p>
-<p>Since free software is not a matter of price, a low price doesn’t make
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Nonfree programs are usually sold for a high price, but sometimes a store
will give you a copy at no charge. That doesn’t make it free software, though.
Price or no price, the program is nonfree because users don’t have freedom.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Since free software is not a matter of price, a low price doesn’t make
the software
free, or even closer to free. So if you are redistributing copies of free
-software, you might as well charge a substantial fee and <em>make
-some money.</em> Redistributing free software is a good and
+software, you might as well charge a substantial fee and
+ <em>
+ make
+some money.
+ </em>
+ Redistributing free software is a good and
legitimate activity; if you do it, you might as well make a profit
from it.
-</p>
-<a name="index-call-to-action_002c-raise-funds"></a>
-<a name="index-development_002c-fundraising-1"></a>
-<p>Free software is a community project, and everyone who depends on it
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-raise-funds">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-development_002c-fundraising-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Free software is a community project, and everyone who depends on it
ought to look for ways to contribute to building the community. For a
-distributor, the way to do this is to give a part of the profit to free
software development projects or to the
-<a name="index-FSF_002c-how-you-can-help-3"></a>
-<a name="index-development_002c-fundraising-2"></a>
-<a name="index-development_002c-contributions-and-donations-2"></a>
-Free Software Foundation. This way you can
+distributor, the way to do this is to give a part of the profit to free
software development projects or to the
+ <a name="index-FSF_002c-how-you-can-help-3">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-development_002c-fundraising-2">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-development_002c-contributions-and-donations-2">
+ </a>
+ Free Software Foundation. This way you can
advance the world of free software.
-</p>
-<p><em>Distributing free software is an opportunity to raise funds for
development. Don’t waste it!</em>
-</p>
-<p>In order to contribute funds, you need to have some extra. If you
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ <em>
+ Distributing free software is an opportunity to raise funds for
development. Don’t waste it!
+ </em>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ In order to contribute funds, you need to have some extra. If you
charge too low a fee, you won’t have anything to spare to support
development.
-</p>
-<a name="Will-a-Higher-Distribution-Price-Hurt-Some-Users_003f"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Will a Higher Distribution Price Hurt Some Users? </h3>
-
-<p>People sometimes worry that a high distribution fee will put free
+ </p>
+ <a name="Will-a-Higher-Distribution-Price-Hurt-Some-Users_003f">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Will a Higher Distribution Price Hurt Some Users?
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ People sometimes worry that a high distribution fee will put free
software out of range for users who don’t have a lot of money. With
proprietary software, a high price does exactly that—but free software
is different.
-</p>
-<p>The difference is that free software naturally tends to spread around,
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The difference is that free software naturally tends to spread around,
and there are many ways to get it.
-</p>
-<p>Software hoarders try their damnedest to stop you from running a
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Software hoarders try their damnedest to stop you from running a
proprietary program without paying the standard price. If this price
is high, that does make it hard for some users to use the program.
-</p>
-<p>With free software, users don’t <em>have</em> to pay the
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ With free software, users don’t
+ <em>
+ have
+ </em>
+ to pay the
distribution fee in order to use the software. They can copy the
program from a friend who has a copy, or with the help of a friend who
has network access. Or several users can join together, split the
price of one CD-ROM, then each in turn can install the software. A high
CD-ROM price is not a major obstacle when the software is free.
-</p>
-<a
name="Will-a-Higher-Distribution-Price-Discourage-Use-of-Free-Software_003f"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Will a Higher Distribution Price Discourage Use of
Free Software? </h3>
-
-<a name="index-selling_002c-and-distribution-fees"></a>
-<p>Another common concern is for the popularity of free software. People
+ </p>
+ <a
name="Will-a-Higher-Distribution-Price-Discourage-Use-of-Free-Software_003f">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Will a Higher Distribution Price Discourage Use of Free Software?
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-selling_002c-and-distribution-fees">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Another common concern is for the popularity of free software. People
think that a high price for distribution would reduce the number of
users, or that a low price is likely to encourage users.
-</p>
-<p>This is true for proprietary software—but free software is
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ This is true for proprietary software—but free software is
different. With so many ways to get copies, the price of distribution
service has less effect on popularity.
-</p>
-<a name="index-call-to-action_002c-develop-more-free-software"></a>
-<p>In the long run, how many people use free software is determined
-mainly by <em>how much free software can do,</em> and how easy it
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-develop-more-free-software">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ In the long run, how many people use free software is determined
+mainly by
+ <em>
+ how much free software can do,
+ </em>
+ and how easy it
is to use. Many users do not make freedom their priority; they
may continue to use proprietary software if
free software can’t do all the jobs they want done. Thus, if we want
to increase the number of users in the long run, we should above all
-<em>develop more free software.</em>
-</p>
-<a name="index-manuals_002c-need-for-2"></a>
-<a name="index-call-to-action_002c-write-free-documentation"></a>
-<p>The most direct way to do this is by writing needed
+ <em>
+ develop more free software.
+ </em>
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-manuals_002c-need-for-2">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-write-free-documentation">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The most direct way to do this is by writing needed
free software or manuals yourself. But if you do
distribution rather than writing, the best way you can help is by
-<a name="index-call-to-action_002c-raise-funds-1"></a>
-raising funds for others to write them.
-</p>
-<a
name="The-Term-_0060_0060Selling-Software_0027_0027-Can-Be-Confusing-Too"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> The Term “Selling Software” Can Be Confusing Too </h3>
-
-<p>Strictly speaking, “selling” means trading goods for
+ <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-raise-funds-1">
+ </a>
+ raising funds for others to write them.
+ </p>
+ <a name="The-Term-_0060_0060Selling-Software_0027_0027-Can-Be-Confusing-Too">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ The Term “Selling Software” Can Be Confusing Too
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ Strictly speaking, “selling” means trading goods for
money. Selling a copy of a free program is legitimate, and we
encourage it.
-</p>
-<p>However, when people think of “selling software,”
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ However, when people think of “selling software,”
they usually imagine doing it the way most companies do it: making the
software proprietary rather than free.
-</p>
-<p>So unless you’re going to draw distinctions carefully, the way this
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ So unless you’re going to draw distinctions carefully, the way this
article does, we suggest it is better to avoid using the term
“selling software” and choose some other wording instead.
For example, you could say “distributing free software for a
fee”—that is unambiguous.
-</p>
-<a name="High-or-Low-Fees_002c-and-the-GNU-GPL"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> High or Low Fees, and the GNU GPL </h3>
-
-<a name="index-GPL_002c-high-or-low-fees-and"></a>
-<p>Except for one special situation, the GNU General Public License (GNU GPL)
+ </p>
+ <a name="High-or-Low-Fees_002c-and-the-GNU-GPL">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ High or Low Fees, and the GNU GPL
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-GPL_002c-high-or-low-fees-and">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Except for one special situation, the GNU General Public License (GNU GPL)
has no requirements about how much you can charge for distributing a
copy of free software. You can charge nothing, a penny, a dollar, or
a billion dollars. It’s up to you, and the marketplace, so don’t
complain to us if nobody wants to pay a billion dollars for a
copy.
-</p>
-<p>The one exception is in the case where binaries are distributed
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The one exception is in the case where binaries are distributed
without the corresponding complete source code. Those who do this are
required by the GNU GPL to provide source code on subsequent request.
Without a limit on the fee for the source code, they would be able set
@@ -189,14 +225,19 @@ concealing it. So in this case we have to limit the fee
for source in order
to ensure the user’s freedom. In ordinary situations, however, there
is no such justification for limiting distribution fees, so we do not
limit them.
-</p>
-<p>Sometimes companies whose activities cross the line stated in the GNU
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Sometimes companies whose activities cross the line stated in the GNU
GPL plead for permission, saying that they “won’t charge
money for the GNU software” or such like. That won’t get them anywhere
with us. Free software is about freedom, and enforcing the GPL is
defending freedom. When we defend users’ freedom, we are not
distracted by side issues such as how much of a distribution fee is
charged. Freedom is the issue, the whole issue, and the only issue.
-<a name="index-selling_002c-free-software-3"></a>
-<a name="index-selling_002c-and-distribution-fees-1"></a>
-</p><hr size="2"></section></body></html>
+ <a name="index-selling_002c-free-software-3">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-selling_002c-and-distribution-fees-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <hr size="2"/>
+</section>
diff --git a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_11.html
b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_11.html
index aa4e759..e77c5e3 100644
--- a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_11.html
+++ b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_11.html
@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
-<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/loose.dtd";>
-<html><!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
+<!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
Free Software Foundation
@@ -19,50 +18,38 @@ ISBN 978-0-9831592-0-9
Cover design by Rob Myers.
Cover photograph by Peter Hinely.
- --><!-- Created on February 18, 2016 by texi2html 1.82
-texi2html was written by:
- Lionel Cons <address@hidden> (original author)
- Karl Berry <address@hidden>
- Olaf Bachmann <address@hidden>
- and many others.
-Maintained by: Many creative people.
-Send bugs and suggestions to <address@hidden>
---><head><title>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 11. The Free Software
Song</title><meta name="description" content="This is the second edition of
Richard Stallman's collection of essays."><meta name="keywords" content="Free
Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 11. The Free Software Song"><meta
name="resource-type" content="document"><meta name="distribution"
content="global"><meta name="Generator" content="texi2html 1.82"><meta
http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf- [...]
-<!--
-a.summary-letter {text-decoration: none}
-blockquote.smallquotation {font-size: smaller}
-pre.display {font-family: serif}
-pre.format {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-comment {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-preformatted {font-family: serif}
-pre.smalldisplay {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallexample {font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallformat {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smalllisp {font-size: smaller}
-span.roman {font-family:serif; font-weight:normal;}
-span.sansserif {font-family:sans-serif; font-weight:normal;}
-ul.toc {list-style: none}
--->
-</style><link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
href="../static/web-common/style.css"></head><body lang="en" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
text="#000000" link="#0000FF" vlink="#800080" alink="#FF0000" class="article">
-
-<a name="Song"></a>
-<header><div id="logo"><a href="/"><img src="../static/gnu.svg" height="100"
width="100"></a></div><h1 class="book-title">Free Software, Free Society, 2nd
ed.</h1></header><section id="main"><a name="The-Free-Software-Song"></a>
-<h1 class="chapter"> 11. The Free Software Song </h1>
-
-<div style="display:none">
+ -->
+
+<section id="main">
+ <a name="The-Free-Software-Song">
+ </a>
+ <h1 class="chapter">
+ 11. The Free Software Song
+ </h1>
+ <div style="display:none">
<p id="teaser">
- The lyrics of “The Free Software Song” are sung to the melody of the
+ The lyrics of “The Free Software Song” are sung to the melody of the
Bulgarian folk song “Sadi moma bela loza.”
</p>
-</div>
-
-<a name="index-Stallman_002c-Richard-3"></a>
-<a name="index-_0060_0060Free-Software-Song_0027_0027"></a>
-<a name="index-_0060_0060Sadi-moma-bela-loza_0027_0027"></a>
-<a name="index-hackers-5"></a>
-<p>The lyrics of “The Free Software Song” are sung to the melody of the
+ </div>
+ <a name="index-Stallman_002c-Richard-3">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-_0060_0060Free-Software-Song_0027_0027">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-_0060_0060Sadi-moma-bela-loza_0027_0027">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-hackers-5">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The lyrics of “The Free Software Song” are sung to the melody of the
Bulgarian folk song “Sadi moma bela loza.” To listen to a recording
of the piece accompanied by Bulgarian instruments played in
traditional style, please visit
-<a
href="http://gnu.org/music/FreeSWSong.ogg";>http://gnu.org/music/FreeSWSong.ogg</a>.
-<br></p> <img
src="/essay/11._The_Free_Software_Song/data/song-book-jutta-scrunch-crop.jpg"
alt="song-book-jutta-scrunch-crop"></section></body></html>
+ <a href="http://gnu.org/music/FreeSWSong.ogg";>
+ http://gnu.org/music/FreeSWSong.ogg
+ </a>
+ .
+ <br/>
+ </p>
+ <img alt="song-book-jutta-scrunch-crop"
src="/essay/11._The_Free_Software_Song/data/song-book-jutta-scrunch-crop.jpg"/>
+</section>
diff --git a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_12.html
b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_12.html
index 4e67431..dd97131 100644
--- a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_12.html
+++ b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_12.html
@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
-<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/loose.dtd";>
-<html><!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
+<!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
Free Software Foundation
@@ -19,44 +18,28 @@ ISBN 978-0-9831592-0-9
Cover design by Rob Myers.
Cover photograph by Peter Hinely.
- --><!-- Created on February 18, 2016 by texi2html 1.82
-texi2html was written by:
- Lionel Cons <address@hidden> (original author)
- Karl Berry <address@hidden>
- Olaf Bachmann <address@hidden>
- and many others.
-Maintained by: Many creative people.
-Send bugs and suggestions to <address@hidden>
---><head><title>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 12. What's in a
Name?</title><meta name="description" content="This is the second edition of
Richard Stallman's collection of essays."><meta name="keywords" content="Free
Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 12. What's in a Name?"><meta
name="resource-type" content="document"><meta name="distribution"
content="global"><meta name="Generator" content="texi2html 1.82"><meta
http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><style [...]
-<!--
-a.summary-letter {text-decoration: none}
-blockquote.smallquotation {font-size: smaller}
-pre.display {font-family: serif}
-pre.format {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-comment {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-preformatted {font-family: serif}
-pre.smalldisplay {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallexample {font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallformat {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smalllisp {font-size: smaller}
-span.roman {font-family:serif; font-weight:normal;}
-span.sansserif {font-family:sans-serif; font-weight:normal;}
-ul.toc {list-style: none}
--->
-</style><link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
href="../static/web-common/style.css"></head><body lang="en" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
text="#000000" link="#0000FF" vlink="#800080" alink="#FF0000" class="article">
+ -->
-<a name="Whats-Name"></a>
-<header><div id="logo"><a href="/"><img src="../static/gnu.svg" height="100"
width="100"></a></div><h1 class="book-title">Free Software, Free Society, 2nd
ed.</h1></header><section id="main"><a name="What_0027s-in-a-Name_003f"></a>
-<h1 class="chapter"> 12. What’s in a Name? </h1>
-
-<a name="index-nonfree-software_002c-insidious-and-nefarious-addition-of"></a>
-<a name="index-terminology_002c-importance-of-using-correct-1"></a>
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Project-5"></a>
-<a
name="index-_0060_0060Linux_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term-_0028see-also-open-source_0029-1"></a>
-<a
name="index-GNU_002c-GNU_002fLinux-v_002e-_0060_0060Linux_0027_0027-_0028see-also-both-open-source-and-terminology_0029"></a>
-<a
name="index-GNU_002fLinux-v_002e-_0060_0060Linux_0027_0027-_0028see-also-both-open-source-and-terminology_0029"></a>
-
-<p>Names convey meanings; our choice of names determines the meaning of
+<section id="main">
+ <a name="What_0027s-in-a-Name_003f">
+ </a>
+ <h1 class="chapter">
+ 12. What’s in a Name?
+ </h1>
+ <a name="index-nonfree-software_002c-insidious-and-nefarious-addition-of">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-terminology_002c-importance-of-using-correct-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Project-5">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-_0060_0060Linux_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term-_0028see-also-open-source_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-GNU_002c-GNU_002fLinux-v_002e-_0060_0060Linux_0027_0027-_0028see-also-both-open-source-and-terminology_0029">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-GNU_002fLinux-v_002e-_0060_0060Linux_0027_0027-_0028see-also-both-open-source-and-terminology_0029">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Names convey meanings; our choice of names determines the meaning of
what we say. An inappropriate name gives people the wrong idea. A
rose by any other name would smell as sweet—but if you call it a pen,
people will be rather disappointed when they try to write with it.
@@ -65,48 +48,54 @@ they are good for. If you call our operating system
Linux, that conveys a mistaken idea of the system’s
origin, history, and purpose. If you call
it GNU/Linux, that conveys (though not in detail) an accurate idea.
-</p>
-<p>Does this really matter for our community? Is it important whether people
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Does this really matter for our community? Is it important whether people
know the system’s origin, history, and purpose? Yes—because people
who forget history are often condemned to repeat it. The Free World
that has developed around GNU/Linux
is not guaranteed to survive; the problems that
led us to develop GNU are not completely eradicated, and they threaten
to come back.
-</p>
-
-<p>When I explain why it’s appropriate to call the operating system
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ When I explain why it’s appropriate to call the operating system
GNU/Linux rather than Linux, people
sometimes respond this way:
-</p>
-<blockquote class="smallquotation">
-<p> Granted that the GNU Project deserves credit for this work, is
+ </p>
+ <blockquote class="smallquotation">
+ <p>
+ Granted that the GNU Project deserves credit for this work, is
it really worth a fuss when people don’t give credit? Isn’t the
important thing that the job was done, not who did it? You
ought to relax, take pride in the job well done, and not worry
about the credit.
-</p>
-</blockquote>
-
-<p>This would be wise advice, if only the situation were like that—if
+ </p>
+ </blockquote>
+ <p>
+ This would be wise advice, if only the situation were like that—if
the job were done and it were time to relax. If only that were true!
But challenges abound, and this is no time to take the future for
granted. Our community’s strength rests on commitment to freedom and
cooperation. Using the name GNU/Linux is a way for people to remind
themselves and inform others of these goals.
-</p>
-
-<p>It is possible to write good free software without thinking of GNU;
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ It is possible to write good free software without thinking of GNU;
much good work has been done in the name of Linux also. But the term
“Linux” has been associated ever since it was first coined
with a philosophy that does not make a commitment to the freedom to
cooperate. As the name is increasingly used by business, we will
have even more trouble making it connect with community spirit.
-</p>
-<a name="index-developers_002c-proprietary-software-1"></a>
-<a
name="index-traps_002c-_0060_0060Linux_0027_0027-distribution-companies"></a>
-<a name="index-citizen-values_002c-convenience-v_002e-3"></a>
-<p>A great challenge to the future of free software comes from the
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-developers_002c-proprietary-software-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-traps_002c-_0060_0060Linux_0027_0027-distribution-companies">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-citizen-values_002c-convenience-v_002e-3">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ A great challenge to the future of free software comes from the
tendency of the “Linux” distribution companies to add
nonfree software to GNU/Linux
in the name of convenience and power. All the major commercial
@@ -115,91 +104,129 @@ Most of them do not clearly identify the nonfree
packages in their distributions. Many even develop nonfree software
and add it to the system. Some outrageously advertise
“Linux” systems that are “licensed per seat,”
-which give the user as much freedom as Microsoft
-<a name="index-Windows"></a>
-Windows.
-</p>
-<p>People try to justify adding nonfree software in the name of the
+which give the user as much freedom as Microsoft
+ <a name="index-Windows">
+ </a>
+ Windows.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ People try to justify adding nonfree software in the name of the
“popularity of Linux”—in effect, valuing popularity above
-freedom. Sometimes this is openly admitted. For instance,
-<a name="index-Wired-magazine"></a>
-<cite>Wired</cite>
-magazine said that
-<a name="index-McMillan_002c-Robert"></a>
-Robert McMillan, editor of
-<a name="index-Linux-Magazine"></a>
-<cite>Linux Magazine</cite>, “feels
+freedom. Sometimes this is openly admitted. For instance,
+ <a name="index-Wired-magazine">
+ </a>
+ <cite>
+ Wired
+ </cite>
+ magazine said that
+ <a name="index-McMillan_002c-Robert">
+ </a>
+ Robert McMillan, editor of
+ <a name="index-Linux-Magazine">
+ </a>
+ <cite>
+ Linux Magazine
+ </cite>
+ , “feels
that the move toward open source software should be fueled by
-technical, rather than political, decisions.”<a name="DOCF28"
href="#FOOT28">(28)</a> And
-<a name="index-Caldera"></a>
-Caldera’s
+technical, rather than political, decisions.”
+ <a href="#FOOT28" name="DOCF28">
+ (28)
+ </a>
+ And
+ <a name="index-Caldera">
+ </a>
+ Caldera’s
CEO openly urged
users to drop the goal of freedom and work instead for the
“popularity of Linux.”
-</p>
-<a
name="index-citizen-values_002c-production-v_002e-freedom-and-way-of-life"></a>
-<p>Adding nonfree software to the GNU/Linux system may increase the
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-citizen-values_002c-production-v_002e-freedom-and-way-of-life">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Adding nonfree software to the GNU/Linux system may increase the
popularity, if by popularity we mean the number of people using some
of GNU/Linux in combination with
nonfree software. But at the same time, it implicitly encourages the
community to accept nonfree software as a good thing, and forget the
goal of freedom. It is not good to drive faster if you can’t stay on the
road.
-</p>
-<a name="index-libraries-_0028comp_002e_0029_002c-as-traps"></a>
-<a name="index-traps_002c-nonfree-libraries-1"></a>
-<a name="index-traps_002c-nonfree-programming-tools"></a>
-<a name="index-developers_002c-traps-for-1"></a>
-<a name="index-Motif-_0028see-also-LessTif_0029-2"></a>
-<a name="index-LessTif-_0028see-also-Motif_0029-2"></a>
-<p>When the nonfree “add-on” is a library or programming
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-libraries-_0028comp_002e_0029_002c-as-traps">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-traps_002c-nonfree-libraries-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-traps_002c-nonfree-programming-tools">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-developers_002c-traps-for-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Motif-_0028see-also-LessTif_0029-2">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-LessTif-_0028see-also-Motif_0029-2">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ When the nonfree “add-on” is a library or programming
tool, it can become a trap for free software developers. When they
write free software that depends on the nonfree package, their
-software cannot be part of a completely free system. Motif and
-<a name="index-Qt-2"></a>
-Qt trapped large amounts of free software in this way in the past,
+software cannot be part of a completely free system. Motif and
+ <a name="index-Qt-2">
+ </a>
+ Qt trapped large amounts of free software in this way in the past,
creating problems whose solutions took years. Motif remained somewhat
of a problem until it became obsolete and was no longer used. Later,
-<a name="index-Sun-Microsystems"></a>
-Sun’s nonfree
-<a name="index-Java"></a>
-Java implementation had a similar effect: the Java Trap,
+ <a name="index-Sun-Microsystems">
+ </a>
+ Sun’s nonfree
+ <a name="index-Java">
+ </a>
+ Java implementation had a similar effect: the Java Trap,
fortunately now mostly corrected.
-</p>
-<p>If our community keeps moving in this direction, it could redirect the
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ If our community keeps moving in this direction, it could redirect the
future of GNU/Linux into a mosaic of free and nonfree components.
Five years from now, we will surely still have plenty of free
software; but if we are not careful, it will hardly be usable without
the nonfree software that users expect to find with it. If this
happens, our campaign for freedom will have failed.
-</p>
-<p>If releasing free alternatives were simply a matter of programming,
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ If releasing free alternatives were simply a matter of programming,
solving future problems might become easier as our community’s
development resources increase. But we face obstacles that threaten to
make this harder: laws that prohibit free software. As software patents
-mount up, and as laws like the
-<a
name="index-DMCA-_0028see-also-_0060_0060Right-to-Read_002c_0027_0027-fair-use_002c-DRM_002c-and-libraries_0029"></a>
-Digital Millennium Copyright Act are used to prohibit the development of free
software
-for important jobs such as viewing a DVD or listening to a
-<a name="index-RealAudio-stream"></a>
-RealAudio
+mount up, and as laws like the
+ <a
name="index-DMCA-_0028see-also-_0060_0060Right-to-Read_002c_0027_0027-fair-use_002c-DRM_002c-and-libraries_0029">
+ </a>
+ Digital Millennium Copyright Act are used to prohibit the development of
free software
+for important jobs such as viewing a DVD or listening to a
+ <a name="index-RealAudio-stream">
+ </a>
+ RealAudio
stream, we will find ourselves with no clear way to fight the patented
-and secret data formats except to <em>reject the nonfree programs
-that use them.</em>
-</p>
-<a name="index-call-to-action_002c-fight-for-freedom"></a>
-<p>Meeting these challenges will require many different kinds of effort.
+and secret data formats except to
+ <em>
+ reject the nonfree programs
+that use them.
+ </em>
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-fight-for-freedom">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Meeting these challenges will require many different kinds of effort.
But what we need above all, to confront any kind of challenge, is to
remember the goal of freedom to cooperate. We can’t expect a mere
desire for powerful, reliable software to motivate people to make
great efforts. We need the kind of determination that people have
when they fight for their freedom and their community—determination
to keep on for years and not give up.
-</p>
-<p>In our community, this goal and this determination emanate mainly from
-the
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Project-6"></a>
-GNU Project. We’re the ones who talk about freedom and community
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ In our community, this goal and this determination emanate mainly from
+the
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Project-6">
+ </a>
+ GNU Project. We’re the ones who talk about freedom and community
as something to stand firm for; the organizations that speak of
“Linux” normally don’t say this. The magazines about
“Linux” are typically full of ads for nonfree software;
@@ -210,10 +237,12 @@ for “Linux” typically invite salesmen to present those
applications. The main place people in our community are likely to
come across the idea of freedom and determination is in the GNU
Project.
-</p>
-<p>But when people come across it, will they feel it relates to them?
-</p>
-<p>People who know they are using a system that came out of the GNU
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ But when people come across it, will they feel it relates to them?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ People who know they are using a system that came out of the GNU
Project can see a direct relationship between themselves and GNU.
They won’t automatically agree with our philosophy, but at least they
will see a reason to think seriously about it. In contrast, people
@@ -222,30 +251,54 @@ the GNU Project “developed tools which proved to be
useful in
Linux,” typically perceive only an indirect relationship between
GNU and themselves. They may just ignore the GNU philosophy when they
come across it.
-</p>
-<p>The GNU Project is idealistic, and anyone encouraging idealism today
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The GNU Project is idealistic, and anyone encouraging idealism today
faces a great obstacle: the prevailing ideology encourages people to
dismiss idealism as “impractical.” Our idealism has been
extremely practical: it is the reason we have a
free GNU/Linux operating system.
People who love this system ought to know that it is our idealism made
real.
-</p>
-<a
name="index-call-to-action_002c-use-correct-terminology-_0028see-also-terminology_0029-2"></a>
-<p>If “the job” really were done, if there were nothing at
+ </p>
+ <a
name="index-call-to-action_002c-use-correct-terminology-_0028see-also-terminology_0029-2">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ If “the job” really were done, if there were nothing at
stake except credit, perhaps it would be wiser to let the matter drop.
But we are not in that position. To inspire people to do the work
that needs to be done, we need to be recognized for what we have
already done. Please help us, by calling the operating
system GNU/Linux.
-<a
name="index-nonfree-software_002c-insidious-and-nefarious-addition-of-1"></a>
-<a name="index-terminology_002c-importance-of-using-correct-2"></a>
-<a
name="index-_0060_0060Linux_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term-_0028see-also-open-source_0029-2"></a>
-<a
name="index-GNU_002fLinux-v_002e-_0060_0060Linux_0027_0027-_0028see-also-both-open-source-and-terminology_0029-1"></a>
-<a
name="index-GNU_002c-GNU_002fLinux-v_002e-_0060_0060Linux_0027_0027-_0028see-also-both-open-source-and-terminology_0029-1"></a>
-</p><div class="footnote">
-<hr><h3>Footnotes</h3>
-<h3><a name="FOOT28" href="#DOCF28">(28)</a></h3>
-<p>Michelle Finley, “French Pols Say, ‘Open It Up,’” 24 April 2000, <a
href="http://wired.com/politics/law/news/2000/04/35862";>http://wired.com/politics/law/news/2000/04/35862</a>.
-</p></div>
-<hr size="2"></section></body></html>
+ <a name="index-nonfree-software_002c-insidious-and-nefarious-addition-of-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-terminology_002c-importance-of-using-correct-2">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-_0060_0060Linux_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term-_0028see-also-open-source_0029-2">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-GNU_002fLinux-v_002e-_0060_0060Linux_0027_0027-_0028see-also-both-open-source-and-terminology_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-GNU_002c-GNU_002fLinux-v_002e-_0060_0060Linux_0027_0027-_0028see-also-both-open-source-and-terminology_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <div class="footnote">
+ <hr>
+ <h3>
+ Footnotes
+ </h3>
+ <h3>
+ <a href="#DOCF28" name="FOOT28">
+ (28)
+ </a>
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ Michelle Finley, “French Pols Say, ‘Open It Up,’” 24 April 2000,
+ <a href="http://wired.com/politics/law/news/2000/04/35862";>
+ http://wired.com/politics/law/news/2000/04/35862
+ </a>
+ .
+ </p>
+ </hr>
+ </div>
+ <hr size="2"/>
+</section>
diff --git a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_13.html
b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_13.html
index 1c8d498..7c70761 100644
--- a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_13.html
+++ b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_13.html
@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
-<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/loose.dtd";>
-<html><!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
+<!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
Free Software Foundation
@@ -19,83 +18,86 @@ ISBN 978-0-9831592-0-9
Cover design by Rob Myers.
Cover photograph by Peter Hinely.
- --><!-- Created on February 18, 2016 by texi2html 1.82
-texi2html was written by:
- Lionel Cons <address@hidden> (original author)
- Karl Berry <address@hidden>
- Olaf Bachmann <address@hidden>
- and many others.
-Maintained by: Many creative people.
-Send bugs and suggestions to <address@hidden>
---><head><title>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 13. Categories of Free
and Nonfree Software</title><meta name="description" content="This is the
second edition of Richard Stallman's collection of essays."><meta
name="keywords" content="Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 13. Categories
of Free and Nonfree Software"><meta name="resource-type"
content="document"><meta name="distribution" content="global"><meta
name="Generator" content="texi2html 1.82"><meta http-equiv="Content-Type [...]
-<!--
-a.summary-letter {text-decoration: none}
-blockquote.smallquotation {font-size: smaller}
-pre.display {font-family: serif}
-pre.format {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-comment {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-preformatted {font-family: serif}
-pre.smalldisplay {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallexample {font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallformat {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smalllisp {font-size: smaller}
-span.roman {font-family:serif; font-weight:normal;}
-span.sansserif {font-family:sans-serif; font-weight:normal;}
-ul.toc {list-style: none}
--->
-</style><link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
href="../static/web-common/style.css"></head><body lang="en" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
text="#000000" link="#0000FF" vlink="#800080" alink="#FF0000" class="article">
-
-<a name="Categories"></a>
-<header><div id="logo"><a href="/"><img src="../static/gnu.svg" height="100"
width="100"></a></div><h1 class="book-title">Free Software, Free Society, 2nd
ed.</h1></header><section id="main"><a
name="Categories-of-Free-and-Nonfree-Software"></a>
-<h1 class="chapter"> 13. Categories of Free and Nonfree Software </h1>
-
-<div style="display:none">
+ -->
+
+<section id="main">
+ <a name="Categories-of-Free-and-Nonfree-Software">
+ </a>
+ <h1 class="chapter">
+ 13. Categories of Free and Nonfree Software
+ </h1>
+ <div style="display:none">
<p id="teaser">
- Free software is software that comes with permission for
+ Free software is software that comes with permission for
anyone to use, copy, and/or distribute, either verbatim or with
modifications, either gratis or for a fee. In particular, this
means that source code must be available. “If it’s not
- source, it’s not software.”
+ source, it’s not software.”
</p>
-</div>
-
-<a
name="index-call-to-action_002c-use-correct-terminology-_0028see-also-terminology_0029-3"></a>
- <img src="category.jpg" alt="category"><blockquote
class="smallquotation"><p><em>This diagram, originally by Chao-Kuei and updated
by several
+ </div>
+ <a
name="index-call-to-action_002c-use-correct-terminology-_0028see-also-terminology_0029-3">
+ </a>
+ <img alt="category" src="category.jpg">
+ <blockquote class="smallquotation">
+ <p>
+ <em>
+ This diagram, originally by Chao-Kuei and updated by several
others since, explains the different categories of software. It’s
-available at <a
href="http://gnu.org/philosophy/categories.html";>http://gnu.org/philosophy/categories.html</a>
as
+available at
+ <a href="http://gnu.org/philosophy/categories.html";>
+ http://gnu.org/philosophy/categories.html
+ </a>
+ as
a Scalable Vector Graphic and as an XFig document, under the terms of
any of the GNU GPL v2 or later, the GNU FDL v1.2 or later, or the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike v2.0 or later. To view a copy
of the Creative Commons license, visit
-<a
href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0";>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0</a>,
or
+ <a href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0";>
+ http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0
+ </a>
+ , or
send a letter to Creative Commons, 171 Second Street,
-Suite 300, San Francisco, California 94105, USA.</em>
-</p></blockquote>
-<br><a name="Free-Software"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Free Software </h3>
-
-<a name="index-software_002c-free-_0028see-also-free-software_0029"></a>
-<a
name="index-free-software-_0028see-also-free-software_002c-four-freedoms_002c-citizen-values_002c-selling_002c-and-software_0029-2"></a>
-
-<p> Free software is software that comes with permission for
+Suite 300, San Francisco, California 94105, USA.
+ </em>
+ </p>
+ </blockquote>
+ <br>
+ <a name="Free-Software">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Free Software
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-software_002c-free-_0028see-also-free-software_0029">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-free-software-_0028see-also-free-software_002c-four-freedoms_002c-citizen-values_002c-selling_002c-and-software_0029-2">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Free software is software that comes with permission for
anyone to use, copy, and/or distribute, either verbatim or with
modifications, either gratis or for a fee. In particular, this
means that source code must be available. “If it’s not
source, it’s not software.” This is a simplified
description; see also the full definition (address@hidden).
-</p>
-<p> If a program is free, then it can potentially be included
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ If a program is free, then it can potentially be included
in a free operating system such as GNU, or free versions of
the GNU/Linux
system.
-</p>
-<p> There are many different ways to make a program free—many
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ There are many different ways to make a program free—many
questions of detail, which could be decided in more than one way
and still make the program free. Some of the possible variations
are described below. For information on specific free software
- licenses, see the license list page, at <a
href="http://gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html";>http://gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html</a>.
-</p>
-<p> Free software is a matter of freedom, not price. But
+ licenses, see the license list page, at
+ <a href="http://gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html";>
+ http://gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html
+ </a>
+ .
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Free software is a matter of freedom, not price. But
proprietary software companies typically use the term
“free software” to refer to price. Sometimes they
mean that you can obtain a binary copy at no charge; sometimes
@@ -103,14 +105,16 @@ Suite 300, San Francisco, California 94105, USA.</em>
buying, and the price includes both. Either way, it has
nothing to do with what we mean by free software in the GNU
Project.
-</p>
-<p> Because of this potential confusion, when a software company
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Because of this potential confusion, when a software company
says its product is free software, always check the actual
distribution terms to see whether users really have all the
freedoms that free software implies. Sometimes it really is free
software; sometimes it isn’t.
-</p>
-<p> Many languages have two separate words for
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Many languages have two separate words for
“free” as in freedom and “free” as in
zero price. For example, French has “libre” and
“gratuit.” Not so English; there is a word
@@ -121,18 +125,25 @@ Suite 300, San Francisco, California 94105, USA.</em>
our list of
translations of the term “free software” into
various other languages (address@hidden Translations-pg}{).
-</p>
-<p> Free software is often more reliable than nonfree software.
-<a name="index-software_002c-free-_0028see-also-free-software_0029-1"></a>
-<a
name="index-free-software-_0028see-also-free-software_002c-four-freedoms_002c-citizen-values_002c-selling_002c-and-software_0029-3"></a>
-</p>
-<a name="Open-Source-Software"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Open Source Software </h3>
-
-<a
name="index-software_002c-open-source-_0028see-also-open-source-software_0029"></a>
-<a name="index-open-source-software-_0028see-also-software_0029"></a>
-
-<p> The term “open source” software is used by some
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Free software is often more reliable than nonfree software.
+ <a name="index-software_002c-free-_0028see-also-free-software_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-free-software-_0028see-also-free-software_002c-four-freedoms_002c-citizen-values_002c-selling_002c-and-software_0029-3">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <a name="Open-Source-Software">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Open Source Software
+ </h3>
+ <a
name="index-software_002c-open-source-_0028see-also-open-source-software_0029">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-open-source-software-_0028see-also-software_0029">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The term “open source” software is used by some
people to mean more or less the same category as free
software. It is not exactly the same class of software: they
accept some licenses that we consider too restrictive, and
@@ -140,28 +151,37 @@ Suite 300, San Francisco, California 94105, USA.</em>
accepted. However, the differences in extension of the
category are small: nearly all free software is open source,
and nearly all open source software is free.
-<a
name="index-free-software_002c-essential-difference-between-open-source-and-1"></a>
-<a
name="index-open-source_002c-essential-difference-between-free-software-and-1"></a>
-</p>
-<p> We prefer the term “free
+ <a
name="index-free-software_002c-essential-difference-between-open-source-and-1">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-open-source_002c-essential-difference-between-free-software-and-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ We prefer the term “free
software” because it refers to
freedom—something that the term “open
source” does not do.
-</p>
-<a name="Public-Domain-Software"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Public Domain Software </h3>
-
-<a
name="index-software_002c-public-domain-_0028see-also-public-domain-software_0029"></a>
-<a name="index-public-domain-software-_0028see-also-software_0029-2"></a>
-<a
name="index-copyright_002c-public-domain-software-and-_0028see-also-public-domain-software_0029"></a>
-
-<p> Public domain software is software that is not copyrighted. If
+ </p>
+ <a name="Public-Domain-Software">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Public Domain Software
+ </h3>
+ <a
name="index-software_002c-public-domain-_0028see-also-public-domain-software_0029">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-public-domain-software-_0028see-also-software_0029-2">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-copyright_002c-public-domain-software-and-_0028see-also-public-domain-software_0029">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Public domain software is software that is not copyrighted. If
the source code is in the public domain, that is a special case of
noncopylefted free
software, which means that some copies or modified versions
may not be free at all.
-</p>
-<p> In some cases, an executable program can be in the public
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ In some cases, an executable program can be in the public
domain but the source code is not available. This is not free
software, because free software requires accessibility of source code.
Meanwhile, most free software is not in the
@@ -169,8 +189,9 @@ Meanwhile, most free software is not in the
public domain; it is
copyrighted, and the copyright holders have legally given permission
for everyone to use it in freedom, using a free software license.
-</p>
-<p> Sometimes people use the term “public domain”
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Sometimes people use the term “public domain”
in a loose fashion to
mean “free” or
“available gratis.” However, “public
@@ -178,27 +199,37 @@ for everyone to use it in freedom, using a free software
license.
copyrighted.” For clarity, we recommend using
“public domain” for that meaning only, and using
other terms to convey the other meanings.
-</p>
-<p> Under the
-<a name="index-copyright_002c-Berne-Convention"></a>
-<a name="index-Berne-Convention-_0028see-also-copyright_0029"></a>
-Berne Convention, which most countries have
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Under the
+ <a name="index-copyright_002c-Berne-Convention">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Berne-Convention-_0028see-also-copyright_0029">
+ </a>
+ Berne Convention, which most countries have
signed, anything written down is automatically
copyrighted. This includes programs. Therefore, if you want a
program you have written to be in the public domain, you must
take some legal steps to disclaim the copyright on it;
otherwise, the program is copyrighted.
-<a
name="index-software_002c-public-domain-_0028see-also-public-domain-software_0029-1"></a>
-<a name="index-public-domain-software-_0028see-also-software_0029-3"></a>
-<a
name="index-copyright_002c-public-domain-software-and-_0028see-also-public-domain-software_0029-1"></a>
-</p>
-<a name="Copylefted-Software"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Copylefted Software </h3>
-
-<a
name="index-software_002c-copylefted-_0028see-also-copylefted-software_0029"></a>
-<a name="index-copylefted-software-_0028see-also-software_0029"></a>
-
-<p>Copylefted software is free software whose distribution terms ensure
+ <a
name="index-software_002c-public-domain-_0028see-also-public-domain-software_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-public-domain-software-_0028see-also-software_0029-3">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-copyright_002c-public-domain-software-and-_0028see-also-public-domain-software_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <a name="Copylefted-Software">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Copylefted Software
+ </h3>
+ <a
name="index-software_002c-copylefted-_0028see-also-copylefted-software_0029">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-copylefted-software-_0028see-also-software_0029">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Copylefted software is free software whose distribution terms ensure
that all copies of all versions carry more or less the same
distribution terms. This means, for instance, that copyleft licenses
generally disallow others to add additional requirements to the
@@ -206,19 +237,26 @@ software (though a limited set of safe added requirements
can be
allowed) and require making source code available. This shields the
program, and its modified versions, from some of the common ways of
making a program proprietary.
-</p>
-<p>Some copyleft licenses, such as GPL version 3, block other
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Some copyleft licenses, such as GPL version 3, block other
means of turning software proprietary, such as tivoization.
-</p>
-<p>In the GNU Project, we copyleft almost all the software we
-write, because our goal is to give <em>every</em> user the freedoms
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ In the GNU Project, we copyleft almost all the software we
+write, because our goal is to give
+ <em>
+ every
+ </em>
+ user the freedoms
implied by the term “free software.” See the essay “Copyleft”
(address@hidden) for more explanation of how copyleft works and
why we use it.
-</p>
-<a name="index-copyleft_002c-and-GPL"></a>
-
-<p>Copyleft is a general concept; to copyleft an actual program,
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-copyleft_002c-and-GPL">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Copyleft is a general concept; to copyleft an actual program,
you need to use a specific set of distribution terms. There are many
possible ways to write copyleft distribution terms, so in principle
there can be many copyleft free software licenses. However, in actual
@@ -227,26 +265,36 @@ License. Two different copyleft licenses are usually
“incompatible,”
which means it is illegal to merge the code using one license with the
code using the other license; therefore, it is good for the community
if people use a single copyleft license.
-</p>
-<a name="Noncopylefted-Free-Software"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Noncopylefted Free Software </h3>
-
-<a
name="index-software_002c-noncopylefted-free-_0028see-also-noncopylefted-free-software_0029"></a>
-<a name="index-noncopylefted-free-software-_0028see-also-software_0029-1"></a>
-<p> Noncopylefted free software comes from the author with
+ </p>
+ <a name="Noncopylefted-Free-Software">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Noncopylefted Free Software
+ </h3>
+ <a
name="index-software_002c-noncopylefted-free-_0028see-also-noncopylefted-free-software_0029">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-noncopylefted-free-software-_0028see-also-software_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Noncopylefted free software comes from the author with
permission to redistribute and modify, and also to add additional
restrictions to it.
-</p>
-<p> If a program is free but not copylefted, then some copies
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ If a program is free but not copylefted, then some copies
or modified versions may not be free at all. A software
company can compile the program, with or without
modifications, and distribute the executable file as
a proprietary software product.
-</p>
-<a name="index-X-Window-System-3"></a>
-<a
name="index-X-Consortium-_0028see-also-Open-Group_002c-its-successor_0029"></a>
-<a name="index-X11-licenses"></a>
-<p> The X Window System illustrates this. The X Consortium
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-X-Window-System-3">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-X-Consortium-_0028see-also-Open-Group_002c-its-successor_0029">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-X11-licenses">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The X Window System illustrates this. The X Consortium
releases X11 with distribution terms that make it noncopylefted free
software. If you wish, you can get a copy which has those distribution
terms and is free. However, there are nonfree versions as well, and
@@ -256,61 +304,89 @@ are using this hardware, X11 is not free software for
you. The
developers of X11 even made X11 nonfree for a while; they were able to
do this because others had contributed their code under the same
noncopyleft license.
-</p>
-<a name="index-X-Window-System-4"></a>
-<a
name="index-X-Consortium-_0028see-also-Open-Group_002c-its-successor_0029-1"></a>
-<a name="index-X11-licenses-1"></a>
-<a
name="index-software_002c-noncopylefted-free-_0028see-also-noncopylefted-free-software_0029-1"></a>
-<a name="index-noncopylefted-free-software-_0028see-also-software_0029-2"></a>
-
-<a name="Lax-Permissive-Licensed-Software"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Lax Permissive Licensed Software </h3>
-
-<a name="index-lax-permissive-licensed-software"></a>
-<a name="index-software_002c-lax-permissive-licensed"></a>
-<p>Lax permissive licenses include the
-<a name="index-X11-licenses-2"></a>
-X11 license and the two
-<a
name="index-BSD-licenses-_0028see-also-both-_0060_0060BSD_002dstyle_0027_0027-and-GPL_0029"></a>
-BSD
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-X-Window-System-4">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-X-Consortium-_0028see-also-Open-Group_002c-its-successor_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-X11-licenses-1">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-software_002c-noncopylefted-free-_0028see-also-noncopylefted-free-software_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-noncopylefted-free-software-_0028see-also-software_0029-2">
+ </a>
+ <a name="Lax-Permissive-Licensed-Software">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Lax Permissive Licensed Software
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-lax-permissive-licensed-software">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-software_002c-lax-permissive-licensed">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Lax permissive licenses include the
+ <a name="index-X11-licenses-2">
+ </a>
+ X11 license and the two
+ <a
name="index-BSD-licenses-_0028see-also-both-_0060_0060BSD_002dstyle_0027_0027-and-GPL_0029">
+ </a>
+ BSD
licenses. These licenses permit almost any use of the code, including
distributing proprietary binaries with or without changing the source
code.
-</p>
-<a name="GPL_002dCovered-Software"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> GPL-Covered Software </h3>
-
-<a
name="index-software_002c-GPL_002dcovered-_0028see-also-GPL_002dcovered-software_0029"></a>
-<a
name="index-GPL_002c-GPL_002dcovered-software-_0028see-also-software_0029"></a>
-<a name="index-GPL_002dcovered-software-_0028see-also-software_0029"></a>
-<p> The GNU GPL (General Public
+ </p>
+ <a name="GPL_002dCovered-Software">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ GPL-Covered Software
+ </h3>
+ <a
name="index-software_002c-GPL_002dcovered-_0028see-also-GPL_002dcovered-software_0029">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-GPL_002c-GPL_002dcovered-software-_0028see-also-software_0029">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GPL_002dcovered-software-_0028see-also-software_0029">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The GNU GPL (General Public
License) is one specific set of distribution terms for
copylefting a program. The GNU Project uses it as the distribution
terms for most GNU software.
-</p>
-<p> To equate free software with GPL-covered software is therefore
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ To equate free software with GPL-covered software is therefore
an error.
-</p>
-<a name="The-GNU-Operating-System"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> The GNU Operating System </h3>
-
-<a name="index-software_002c-GNU-operating-system-_0028see-also-GNU_0029"></a>
-<a
name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-operating-system-_0028see-also-both-software-and-GNU_0029"></a>
-
-<p> The GNU operating system is the
+ </p>
+ <a name="The-GNU-Operating-System">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ The GNU Operating System
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-software_002c-GNU-operating-system-_0028see-also-GNU_0029">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-operating-system-_0028see-also-both-software-and-GNU_0029">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The GNU operating system is the
Unix-like operating system, which is entirely free software, that
we in the GNU Project have developed since 1984.
-</p>
-<a name="index-TeX-2"></a>
-<p> A Unix-like operating system consists of many programs. The GNU
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-TeX-2">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ A Unix-like operating system consists of many programs. The GNU
system includes all the GNU software, as well as many other
packages, such as the X Window System and TeX, which are not GNU
software.
-</p>
-<a name="index-Hurd_002c-GNU-1"></a>
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Hurd-2"></a>
-<a name="index-kernel_002c-GNU-Hurd-1"></a>
-<p> The first test release of the complete GNU system was in
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-Hurd_002c-GNU-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Hurd-2">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-kernel_002c-GNU-Hurd-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The first test release of the complete GNU system was in
1996. This includes the GNU Hurd, our kernel, developed since
1990. In 2001 the GNU system (including the GNU Hurd) began
working fairly reliably, but the Hurd still lacks some
@@ -319,8 +395,9 @@ code.
an offshoot of the GNU operating system which uses Linux as
the kernel instead of the GNU Hurd, has been a great success
since the 90s.
-</p>
-<p> Since the purpose of GNU is to be free, every single
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Since the purpose of GNU is to be free, every single
component in the GNU operating system has to be free
software. They don’t all have to be copylefted, however; any
kind of free software is legally suitable to include if it
@@ -328,156 +405,222 @@ code.
components to be GNU software, individually. GNU can and does
include noncopylefted free software such as the X Window
System that were developed by other projects.
-</p>
-<a name="GNU-Programs"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> GNU Programs </h3>
-
-<a name="index-software_002c-GNU-programs-_0028see-also-GNU-programs_0029"></a>
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-programs-_0028see-also-software_0029-1"></a>
-
-<p> “GNU programs” is equivalent
+ </p>
+ <a name="GNU-Programs">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ GNU Programs
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-software_002c-GNU-programs-_0028see-also-GNU-programs_0029">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-programs-_0028see-also-software_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ “GNU programs” is equivalent
to GNU software. A program Foo is a
GNU program if it is GNU software. We also sometimes say it
is a “GNU package.”
-</p>
-<a name="GNU-Software"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> GNU Software </h3>
-
-<a name="index-software_002c-GNU_0028see-also-GNU-software_0029"></a>
-<a name="index-GNU-_0028see-also-both-software-and-GNU_0029-3"></a>
-<p> GNU software is
+ </p>
+ <a name="GNU-Software">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ GNU Software
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-software_002c-GNU_0028see-also-GNU-software_0029">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GNU-_0028see-also-both-software-and-GNU_0029-3">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ GNU software is
software that is released under the auspices of the GNU Project. If a
program is GNU
software, we also say that it is a GNU program or a GNU
package. The README or manual of a GNU package should say it
is one; also,
the Free Software Directory identifies all GNU packages.
-</p>
-
-<p> Most GNU software is copylefted, but not all; however,
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Most GNU software is copylefted, but not all; however,
all GNU software must be free software.
-</p>
-<a name="index-FSF_002c-software-development"></a>
-<a name="index-FSF_002c-copyright-on-software"></a>
-<p> Some GNU software was written by staff of the Free Software
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-FSF_002c-software-development">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-FSF_002c-copyright-on-software">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Some GNU software was written by staff of the Free Software
Foundation, but most GNU software comes from many volunteers. (Some of
these volunteers are paid by companies or universities, but they are
volunteers for us.) Some contributed software is copyrighted by the
Free Software Foundation; some is copyrighted by the contributors who
wrote it.
-<a name="index-software_002c-GNU_0028see-also-GNU-software_0029-1"></a>
-<a name="index-GNU-_0028see-also-both-software-and-GNU_0029-4"></a>
-</p>
-<a name="Nonfree-Software"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Nonfree Software </h3>
-
-<a name="index-software_002c-nonfree-_0028see-also-nonfree-software_0029"></a>
-<a name="index-nonfree-software-_0028see-also-software_0029"></a>
-<p> Nonfree software is any software that is not free.
+ <a name="index-software_002c-GNU_0028see-also-GNU-software_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GNU-_0028see-also-both-software-and-GNU_0029-4">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <a name="Nonfree-Software">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Nonfree Software
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-software_002c-nonfree-_0028see-also-nonfree-software_0029">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-nonfree-software-_0028see-also-software_0029">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Nonfree software is any software that is not free.
Its use, redistribution or modification is prohibited, or
requires you to ask for permission, or is restricted so much
that you effectively can’t do it freely.
-</p>
-<a name="Proprietary-Software"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Proprietary Software </h3>
-
-<a
name="index-software_002c-proprietary-_0028see-also-proprietary-software_0029"></a>
-<a name="index-proprietary-software-_0028see-also-software_0029"></a>
-<p> Proprietary software is another name for nonfree software.
+ </p>
+ <a name="Proprietary-Software">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Proprietary Software
+ </h3>
+ <a
name="index-software_002c-proprietary-_0028see-also-proprietary-software_0029">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-proprietary-software-_0028see-also-software_0029">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Proprietary software is another name for nonfree software.
In the past we subdivided nonfree software into
“semifree software,” which could be modified and
redistributed noncommercially, and “proprietary
software,” which could not be. But we have dropped that
distinction and now use “proprietary software” as
synonymous with nonfree software.
-</p>
-<a name="index-FSF_002c-on-installing-proprietary-software"></a>
-<p> The Free Software Foundation follows the rule that we cannot
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-FSF_002c-on-installing-proprietary-software">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The Free Software Foundation follows the rule that we cannot
install any proprietary program on our computers except temporarily
for the specific purpose of writing a free replacement for that
very program. Aside from that, we feel there is no possible excuse
for installing a proprietary program.
-</p>
-<p> For example, we felt justified in installing Unix on our
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ For example, we felt justified in installing Unix on our
computer in the 1980s, because we were using it to write a free
replacement for Unix. Nowadays, since free operating systems are
available, the excuse is no longer applicable; we do not use any
nonfree operating systems, and any new computer we install
must run a completely free operating system.
-</p>
-<p> We don’t insist that users of GNU, or contributors to GNU, have
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ We don’t insist that users of GNU, or contributors to GNU, have
to live by this rule. It is a rule we made for ourselves. But we
hope you will follow it too, for your freedom’s sake.
-</p>
-<a name="Freeware"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Freeware </h3>
-
-<a name="index-software_002c-freeware-_0028see-also-freeware_0029"></a>
-<a name="index-_0060_0060freeware_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term"></a>
-<p> The term “freeware” has no clear accepted
+ </p>
+ <a name="Freeware">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Freeware
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-software_002c-freeware-_0028see-also-freeware_0029">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-_0060_0060freeware_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The term “freeware” has no clear accepted
definition, but it is commonly used for packages which permit
redistribution but not modification (and their source code is
- not available). These packages are <em>not</em> free software,
+ not available). These packages are
+ <em>
+ not
+ </em>
+ free software,
so please don’t use “freeware” to refer to free
software.
-</p>
-<a name="Shareware"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Shareware </h3>
-
-<a name="index-software_002c-shareware"></a>
-<a name="index-shareware-_0028see-also-software_0029"></a>
-<p> Shareware is software which comes with permission for people to
+ </p>
+ <a name="Shareware">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Shareware
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-software_002c-shareware">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-shareware-_0028see-also-software_0029">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Shareware is software which comes with permission for people to
redistribute copies, but says that anyone who continues to use a
- copy is <em>required</em> to pay a license fee.
-</p>
-<p> Shareware is not free software, or even semifree. There are two
+ copy is
+ <em>
+ required
+ </em>
+ to pay a license fee.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Shareware is not free software, or even semifree. There are two
reasons it is not:
-
-</p>
-<ul><li>
-For most shareware, source code is not available; thus, you cannot modify the
program at all.
-
-</li><li>
-Shareware does not come with permission to make a copy and install it without
paying a license fee, not even for individuals engaging in nonprofit activity.
(In practice, people often disregard the distribution terms and do this
anyway, but the terms don’t permit it.)
-
-</li></ul><a name="index-software_002c-shareware-1"></a>
-<a name="index-shareware-_0028see-also-software_0029-1"></a>
-
-<a name="Private-Software"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Private Software </h3>
-
-<a name="index-software_002c-private"></a>
-<a name="index-private-software-_0028see-also-software_0029"></a>
-<a name="index-development_002c-private-software"></a>
-<p> Private or custom software is software developed for one user
+ </p>
+ <ul>
+ <li>
+ For most shareware, source code is not available; thus, you cannot modify
the program at all.
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ Shareware does not come with permission to make a copy and install it
without paying a license fee, not even for individuals engaging in nonprofit
activity. (In practice, people often disregard the distribution terms and do
this anyway, but the terms don’t permit it.)
+ </li>
+ </ul>
+ <a name="index-software_002c-shareware-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-shareware-_0028see-also-software_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="Private-Software">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Private Software
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-software_002c-private">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-private-software-_0028see-also-software_0029">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-development_002c-private-software">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Private or custom software is software developed for one user
(typically an organization or company). That user keeps it and uses
it, and does not release it to the public either as source code or
as binaries.
-</p>
-<p> A private program is free software in a trivial sense if its
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ A private program is free software in a trivial sense if its
sole user has full rights to it.
-</p>
-<p> In general we do not believe it is wrong to develop a program
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ In general we do not believe it is wrong to develop a program
and not release it. There are occasions when a program is so useful
that withholding it from release is treating humanity badly.
However, most programs are not that important, so not releasing them
is not particularly harmful. Thus, there is no conflict between the
development of private or custom software and the principles of the
free software movement.
-</p>
-<p> Nearly all employment for programmers is in development of
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Nearly all employment for programmers is in development of
custom software; therefore most programming jobs are, or could be,
done in a way compatible with the free software movement.
-</p>
-<a name="Commercial-Software"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Commercial Software </h3>
-
-<a
name="index-software_002c-commercial-_0028see-also-commercial-software_0029"></a>
-<a name="index-commercial-software-_0028see-also-software_0029"></a>
-<a
name="index-commercial-software_002c-to-be-distinguished-from-proprietary-software"></a>
-<a
name="index-proprietary-software_002c-to-be-distinguished-from-commercial-software"></a>
-<a name="index-development_002c-commercial-software"></a>
-<p> Commercial software is software being developed by a
+ </p>
+ <a name="Commercial-Software">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Commercial Software
+ </h3>
+ <a
name="index-software_002c-commercial-_0028see-also-commercial-software_0029">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-commercial-software-_0028see-also-software_0029">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-commercial-software_002c-to-be-distinguished-from-proprietary-software">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-proprietary-software_002c-to-be-distinguished-from-commercial-software">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-development_002c-commercial-software">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Commercial software is software being developed by a
business which aims to make money from the use of the
software. “Commercial” and
“proprietary” are not the same thing! Most
@@ -485,27 +628,41 @@ Shareware does not come with permission to make a copy
and install it without pa
is proprietary, but there
is commercial free software, and there is noncommercial
nonfree software.
-</p>
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Ada-compiler-1"></a>
-<a name="index-Ada-compiler_002c-GNU-1"></a>
-<p> For example, GNU Ada is developed by a company. It is always
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Ada-compiler-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Ada-compiler_002c-GNU-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ For example, GNU Ada is developed by a company. It is always
distributed under the terms of the GNU GPL, and every copy is
free software; but its developers sell support contracts. When
their salesmen speak to prospective customers, sometimes the
customers say, “We would feel safer with a commercial
compiler.” The salesmen reply, “GNU
- Ada <em>is</em> a commercial compiler; it happens to be free
+ Ada
+ <em>
+ is
+ </em>
+ a commercial compiler; it happens to be free
software.”
-</p>
-<p> For the GNU Project, the emphasis is in the other order:
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ For the GNU Project, the emphasis is in the other order:
the important thing is that GNU Ada is free software; whether
it is commercial is just a detail. However, the additional
development of GNU Ada that results from its being commercial
is definitely beneficial.
-</p>
-<p> Please help spread the awareness that free commercial
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Please help spread the awareness that free commercial
software is possible. You can do this by making an effort not
to say “commercial” when you mean
“proprietary.”
-<a
name="index-call-to-action_002c-use-correct-terminology-_0028see-also-terminology_0029-4"></a>
-</p><hr size="2"></section></body></html>
+ <a
name="index-call-to-action_002c-use-correct-terminology-_0028see-also-terminology_0029-4">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <hr size="2"/>
+ </br>
+ </img>
+</section>
diff --git a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_14.html
b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_14.html
index a80db95..7d896e4 100644
--- a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_14.html
+++ b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_14.html
@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
-<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/loose.dtd";>
-<html><!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
+<!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
Free Software Foundation
@@ -19,84 +18,77 @@ ISBN 978-0-9831592-0-9
Cover design by Rob Myers.
Cover photograph by Peter Hinely.
- --><!-- Created on February 18, 2016 by texi2html 1.82
-texi2html was written by:
- Lionel Cons <address@hidden> (original author)
- Karl Berry <address@hidden>
- Olaf Bachmann <address@hidden>
- and many others.
-Maintained by: Many creative people.
-Send bugs and suggestions to <address@hidden>
---><head><title>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 14. Why Open Source
Misses the Point of Free Software</title><meta name="description" content="This
is the second edition of Richard Stallman's collection of essays."><meta
name="keywords" content="Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 14. Why Open
Source Misses the Point of Free Software"><meta name="resource-type"
content="document"><meta name="distribution" content="global"><meta
name="Generator" content="texi2html 1.82"><meta http [...]
-<!--
-a.summary-letter {text-decoration: none}
-blockquote.smallquotation {font-size: smaller}
-pre.display {font-family: serif}
-pre.format {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-comment {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-preformatted {font-family: serif}
-pre.smalldisplay {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallexample {font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallformat {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smalllisp {font-size: smaller}
-span.roman {font-family:serif; font-weight:normal;}
-span.sansserif {font-family:sans-serif; font-weight:normal;}
-ul.toc {list-style: none}
--->
-</style><link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
href="../static/web-common/style.css"></head><body lang="en" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
text="#000000" link="#0000FF" vlink="#800080" alink="#FF0000" class="article">
+ -->
-<a name="OS-Misses-Point"></a>
-<header><div id="logo"><a href="/"><img src="../static/gnu.svg" height="100"
width="100"></a></div><h1 class="book-title">Free Software, Free Society, 2nd
ed.</h1></header><section id="main"><a
name="Why-Open-Source-Misses-the-Point-of-Free-Software"></a>
-<h1 class="chapter"> 14. Why Open Source Misses the Point of Free Software
</h1>
-
-<a name="index-open-source-software-_0028see-also-software_0029-1"></a>
-<a name="index-terminology_002c-importance-of-using-correct-3"></a>
-<a
name="index-free-software_002c-essential-difference-between-open-source-and-2"></a>
-<a
name="index-open-source_002c-essential-difference-between-free-software-and-2"></a>
-<p>When we call software “free,” we mean that it respects the users’
+<section id="main">
+ <a name="Why-Open-Source-Misses-the-Point-of-Free-Software">
+ </a>
+ <h1 class="chapter">
+ 14. Why Open Source Misses the Point of Free Software
+ </h1>
+ <a name="index-open-source-software-_0028see-also-software_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-terminology_002c-importance-of-using-correct-3">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-free-software_002c-essential-difference-between-open-source-and-2">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-open-source_002c-essential-difference-between-free-software-and-2">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ When we call software “free,” we mean that it respects the users’
essential freedoms: the freedom to run it, to study and change it, and
to redistribute copies with or without changes. This is a matter of
freedom, not price, so think of “free speech,” not “free beer.”
-</p>
-<p>These freedoms are vitally important. They are essential, not just for
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ These freedoms are vitally important. They are essential, not just for
the individual users’ sake, but for society as a whole because they
promote social solidarity—that is, sharing and cooperation. They
become even more important as our culture and life activities are
increasingly digitized. In a world of digital sounds, images, and
words, free software becomes increasingly essential for freedom in
general.
-</p>
-<a name="index-India-1"></a>
-<p>Tens of millions of people around the world now use free software; the
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-India-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Tens of millions of people around the world now use free software; the
public schools of some regions of India and
-<a name="index-Spain"></a>
-Spain now teach all students to use the free GNU/Linux operating
+ <a name="index-Spain">
+ </a>
+ Spain now teach all students to use the free GNU/Linux operating
system. Most of these users, however, have never heard of the ethical
reasons for which we developed this system and built the free software
community, because nowadays this system and community are more often
spoken of as “open source,” attributing them to a different
philosophy in which these freedoms are hardly mentioned.
-</p>
-<a name="index-free-software-movement-_0028see-also-GNU-Project_0029"></a>
-<p>The free software movement has campaigned for computer users’ freedom
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-free-software-movement-_0028see-also-GNU-Project_0029">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The free software movement has campaigned for computer users’ freedom
since 1983. In 1984 we launched the development of the free operating
system GNU, so that we could avoid the nonfree operating systems that
deny freedom to their users. During the 1980s, we developed most of
the essential components of the system and designed the GNU General
Public License (GNU GPL) to release them under—a license designed
specifically to protect freedom for all users of a program.
-</p>
-<a name="index-_0060_0060open-source_002c_0027_0027-values-of-2"></a>
-<p>Not all of the users and developers of free software agreed with the
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-_0060_0060open-source_002c_0027_0027-values-of-2">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Not all of the users and developers of free software agreed with the
goals of the free software movement. In 1998, a part of the free
software community splintered off and began campaigning in the name of
“open source.” The term was originally proposed to avoid a possible
misunderstanding of the term “free software,” but it soon became
associated with philosophical views quite different from those of the
free software movement.
-</p>
-<a name="index-citizen-values_002c-open-source-v_002e-free-software-1"></a>
-<p>Some of the supporters of open source considered the term a
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-citizen-values_002c-open-source-v_002e-free-software-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Some of the supporters of open source considered the term a
“marketing campaign for free software,” which would appeal to
business executives by highlighting the software’s practical benefits,
while not raising issues of right and wrong that they might not like
@@ -107,8 +99,9 @@ open source, they neither cited nor advocated those values.
The term
based only on practical values, such as making or having powerful,
reliable software. Most of the supporters of open source have come to
it since then, and they make the same association.
-</p>
-<p>Nearly all open source software is free software. The two terms
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Nearly all open source software is free software. The two terms
describe almost the same category of software, but they stand for
views based on fundamentally different values. Open source is a
development methodology; free software is a social movement. For the
@@ -120,31 +113,44 @@ software is an inferior solution to the practical problem
at hand.
For the free software movement, however, nonfree software is a social
problem, and the solution is to stop using it and move to free
software.
-</p>
-<a name="index-call-to-action_002c-teach-others-to-value-freedom"></a>
-<a
name="index-call-to-action_002c-use-correct-terminology-_0028see-also-terminology_0029-5"></a>
-<p>“Free software.” “Open source.” If it’s the same software, does it
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-teach-others-to-value-freedom">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-call-to-action_002c-use-correct-terminology-_0028see-also-terminology_0029-5">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ “Free software.” “Open source.” If it’s the same software, does it
matter which name you use? Yes, because different words convey
different ideas. While a free program by any other name would give you
the same freedom today, establishing freedom in a lasting way depends
above all on teaching people to value freedom. If you want to help do
this, it is essential to speak of “free software.”
-</p>
-<p>We in the free software movement don’t think of the open source camp
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ We in the free software movement don’t think of the open source camp
as an enemy; the enemy is proprietary (nonfree) software. But we want
people to know we stand for freedom, so we do not accept being
mislabeled as open source supporters.
-<a name="index-_0060_0060open-source_002c_0027_0027-values-of-3"></a>
-<a
name="index-free-software_002c-essential-difference-between-open-source-and-3"></a>
-<a
name="index-open-source_002c-essential-difference-between-free-software-and-3"></a>
-<a name="index-open-source-software-_0028see-also-software_0029-2"></a>
-</p>
-<a
name="Common-Misunderstandings-of-_0060_0060Free-Software_0027_0027-and-_0060_0060Open-Source_0027_0027"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Common Misunderstandings of “Free Software” and “Open
Source” </h3>
-
-<a
name="index-_0060_0060open-source_002c_0027_0027-common-misunderstandings-of"></a>
-<a
name="index-_0060_0060free-software_002c_0027_0027-common-misunderstandings-of"></a>
-<p>The term “free software” is prone to misinterpretation: an
+ <a name="index-_0060_0060open-source_002c_0027_0027-values-of-3">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-free-software_002c-essential-difference-between-open-source-and-3">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-open-source_002c-essential-difference-between-free-software-and-3">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-open-source-software-_0028see-also-software_0029-2">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <a
name="Common-Misunderstandings-of-_0060_0060Free-Software_0027_0027-and-_0060_0060Open-Source_0027_0027">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Common Misunderstandings of “Free Software” and “Open Source”
+ </h3>
+ <a
name="index-_0060_0060open-source_002c_0027_0027-common-misunderstandings-of">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-_0060_0060free-software_002c_0027_0027-common-misunderstandings-of">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The term “free software” is prone to misinterpretation: an
unintended meaning, “software you can get for zero price,” fits the
term just as well as the intended meaning, “software which gives the
user certain freedoms.” We address this problem by publishing the
@@ -152,58 +158,90 @@ definition of free software, and by saying, “Think of
‘free speech,’
not ‘free beer.’” This is not a perfect solution; it cannot
completely eliminate the problem. An unambiguous and correct term
would be better, if it didn’t present other problems.
-</p>
-<a
name="index-_0060_0060free-software_002c_0027_0027-unambiguous-translations-of-1"></a>
-<p>Unfortunately, all the alternatives in English have problems of their
+ </p>
+ <a
name="index-_0060_0060free-software_002c_0027_0027-unambiguous-translations-of-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Unfortunately, all the alternatives in English have problems of their
own. We’ve looked at many that people have suggested, but none is so
clearly “right” that switching to it would be a good idea. (For
instance, in some contexts the French and Spanish word “libre” works
well, but people in India do not recognize it at all.) Every proposed
replacement for “free software” has some kind of semantic
problem—and this includes “open source software.”
-<a name="index-India-2"></a>
-</p>
-<p>The official definition of “open source software”<a name="DOCF29"
href="#FOOT29">(29)</a> (which is
+ <a name="index-India-2">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The official definition of “open source software”
+ <a href="#FOOT29" name="DOCF29">
+ (29)
+ </a>
+ (which is
published by the
-<a name="index-Open-Source-Initiative-_0028OSI_0029"></a>
-Open Source Initiative and is too long to include here)
+ <a name="index-Open-Source-Initiative-_0028OSI_0029">
+ </a>
+ Open Source Initiative and is too long to include here)
was derived indirectly from our criteria for free software. It is not
the same; it is a little looser in some respects, so the open source
people have accepted a few licenses that we consider unacceptably
restrictive. Also, they judge solely by the license of the source
code, whereas our criterion also considers whether a device will let
-you <em>run</em> your modified version of the program. Nonetheless,
+you
+ <em>
+ run
+ </em>
+ your modified version of the program. Nonetheless,
their definition agrees with our definition in most cases.
-</p>
-<p>However, the obvious meaning for the expression “open source
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ However, the obvious meaning for the expression “open source
software”—and the one most people seem to think it means—is “You
can look at the source code.” That criterion is much weaker than the
free software definition, much weaker also than the official
definition of open source. It includes many programs that are neither
free nor open source.
-</p>
-<p>Since that obvious meaning for “open source” is not the meaning that
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Since that obvious meaning for “open source” is not the meaning that
its advocates intend, the result is that most people misunderstand the
term. According to writer
-<a name="index-Stephenson_002c-Neal"></a>
-Neal Stephenson, “Linux is ‘open source’ software, meaning simply,
-anyone can get copies of its source code files.”<a name="DOCF30"
href="#FOOT30">(30)</a> I don’t think he
+ <a name="index-Stephenson_002c-Neal">
+ </a>
+ Neal Stephenson, “Linux is ‘open source’ software, meaning simply,
+anyone can get copies of its source code files.”
+ <a href="#FOOT30" name="DOCF30">
+ (30)
+ </a>
+ I don’t think he
deliberately sought to reject or dispute the “official”
definition. I think he simply applied the conventions of the English
language to come up with a meaning for the term. The state of
-<a name="index-Kansas"></a>
-Kansas published a similar definition: “Make use
+ <a name="index-Kansas">
+ </a>
+ Kansas published a similar definition: “Make use
of open-source software (OSS). OSS is software for which the source
code is freely and publicly available, though the specific licensing
agreements vary as to what one is allowed to do with that code.”
-</p>
-<a name="index-New-York-Times"></a>
-<p>The <cite>New York Times</cite> has run an article that stretches the
-meaning of the term to refer to user beta testing<a name="DOCF31"
href="#FOOT31">(31)</a>—letting a few users try an early
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-New-York-Times">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The
+ <cite>
+ New York Times
+ </cite>
+ has run an article that stretches the
+meaning of the term to refer to user beta testing
+ <a href="#FOOT31" name="DOCF31">
+ (31)
+ </a>
+ —letting a few users try an early
version and give confidential feedback—which proprietary software
developers have practiced for decades.
-</p>
-<p>Open source supporters try to deal with this by pointing to their
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Open source supporters try to deal with this by pointing to their
official definition, but that corrective approach is less effective
for them than it is for us. The term “free software” has two natural
meanings, one of which is the intended meaning, so a person who has
@@ -212,121 +250,159 @@ wrong again. But the term “open source” has only one
natural
meaning, which is different from the meaning its supporters intend.
So there is no succinct way to explain and justify its official
definition. That makes for worse confusion.
-</p>
-<a name="index-GPL_002c-_0060_0060open-source_0027_0027-and"></a>
-<a name="index-_0060_0060open-source_002c_0027_0027-the-GPL-and"></a>
-<a
name="index-GPL_002c-GPL_002dcovered-software-_0028see-also-software_0029-1"></a>
-<a name="index-GPL_002dcovered-software-_0028see-also-software_0029-1"></a>
-<p>Another misunderstanding of “open source” is the idea that it means
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-GPL_002c-_0060_0060open-source_0027_0027-and">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-_0060_0060open-source_002c_0027_0027-the-GPL-and">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-GPL_002c-GPL_002dcovered-software-_0028see-also-software_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GPL_002dcovered-software-_0028see-also-software_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Another misunderstanding of “open source” is the idea that it means
“not using the GNU GPL.” This tends to accompany another
misunderstanding that “free software” means “GPL-covered
software.” These are both mistaken, since the GNU GPL qualifies as an
open source license and most of the open source licenses qualify as
free software licenses.
-</p>
-<p>The term “open source” has been further stretched by its application
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The term “open source” has been further stretched by its application
to other activities, such as government, education, and science, where
there is no such thing as source code, and where criteria for software
licensing are simply not pertinent. The only thing these activities
have in common is that they somehow invite people to participate.
They stretch the term so far that it only means “participatory.”
-<a
name="index-_0060_0060open-source_002c_0027_0027-common-misunderstandings-of-1"></a>
-<a
name="index-_0060_0060free-software_002c_0027_0027-common-misunderstandings-of-1"></a>
-</p>
-<a
name="Different-Values-Can-Lead-to-Similar-Conclusions_2026but-Not-Always"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Different Values Can Lead to Similar Conclusions…but
Not Always </h3>
-
-<p>Radical groups in the 1960s had a reputation for factionalism: some
+ <a
name="index-_0060_0060open-source_002c_0027_0027-common-misunderstandings-of-1">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-_0060_0060free-software_002c_0027_0027-common-misunderstandings-of-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <a name="Different-Values-Can-Lead-to-Similar-Conclusions_2026but-Not-Always">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Different Values Can Lead to Similar Conclusions…but Not Always
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ Radical groups in the 1960s had a reputation for factionalism: some
organizations split because of disagreements on details of strategy,
and the two daughter groups treated each other as enemies despite
having similar basic goals and values. The right wing made much of
this and used it to criticize the entire left.
-</p>
-<p>Some try to disparage the free software movement by comparing our
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Some try to disparage the free software movement by comparing our
disagreement with open source to the disagreements of those radical
groups. They have it backwards. We disagree with the open source camp
on the basic goals and values, but their views and ours lead in many
cases to the same practical behavior—such as developing free
software.
-</p>
-<p>As a result, people from the free software movement and the open
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ As a result, people from the free software movement and the open
source camp often work together on practical projects such as software
development. It is remarkable that such different philosophical views
can so often motivate different people to participate in the same
projects. Nonetheless, there are situations where these fundamentally
different views lead to very different actions.
-</p>
-<p>The idea of open source is that allowing users to change and
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The idea of open source is that allowing users to change and
redistribute the software will make it more powerful and reliable.
But this is not guaranteed. Developers of proprietary software are not
necessarily incompetent. Sometimes they produce a program that is
powerful and reliable, even though it does not respect the users’
freedom. Free software activists and open source enthusiasts will
react very differently to that.
-</p>
-<a name="index-_0060_0060open-source_002c_0027_0027-values-of-4"></a>
-<p>A pure open source enthusiast, one that is not at all influenced by
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-_0060_0060open-source_002c_0027_0027-values-of-4">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ A pure open source enthusiast, one that is not at all influenced by
the ideals of free software, will say, “I am surprised you were able
to make the program work so well without using our development model,
but you did. How can I get a copy?” This attitude will reward schemes
that take away our freedom, leading to its loss.
-</p>
-<p>The free software activist will say, “Your program is very
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The free software activist will say, “Your program is very
attractive, but I value my freedom more. So I reject your program.
Instead I will support a project to develop a free replacement.” If
we value our freedom, we can act to maintain and defend it.
-</p>
-<a name="Powerful_002c-Reliable-Software-Can-Be-Bad"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Powerful, Reliable Software Can Be Bad </h3>
-
-<a name="index-DRM_002c-open-source-and"></a>
-<a name="index-open-source_002c-DRM-and"></a>
-<p>The idea that we want software to be powerful and reliable comes from
+ </p>
+ <a name="Powerful_002c-Reliable-Software-Can-Be-Bad">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Powerful, Reliable Software Can Be Bad
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-DRM_002c-open-source-and">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-open-source_002c-DRM-and">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The idea that we want software to be powerful and reliable comes from
the supposition that the software is designed to serve its users. If
it is powerful and reliable, that means it serves them better.
-</p>
-<p>But software can be said to serve its users only if it respects their
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ But software can be said to serve its users only if it respects their
freedom. What if the software is designed to put chains on its users?
Then powerfulness means the chains are more constricting, and
reliability that they are harder to remove. Malicious features, such
as spying on the users, restricting the users, back doors, and imposed
upgrades are common in proprietary software, and some open source
supporters want to implement them in open source programs.
-</p>
-<p>Under pressure from the movie and record companies, software for
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Under pressure from the movie and record companies, software for
individuals to use is increasingly designed specifically to restrict
them. This malicious feature is known as Digital Restrictions
Management (DRM) (see
-<a name="index-Defective-by-Design-_0028see-also-DRM_0029"></a>
-<a href="http://defectivebydesign.org";>http://defectivebydesign.org</a>) and is
+ <a name="index-Defective-by-Design-_0028see-also-DRM_0029">
+ </a>
+ <a href="http://defectivebydesign.org";>
+ http://defectivebydesign.org
+ </a>
+ ) and is
the antithesis in spirit of the freedom that free software aims to
provide. And not just in spirit: since the goal of DRM is to trample
your freedom, DRM developers try to make it hard, impossible, or even
illegal for you to change the software that implements the DRM.
-</p>
-<p>Yet some open source supporters have proposed “open source DRM”
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Yet some open source supporters have proposed “open source DRM”
software. Their idea is that, by publishing the source code of
programs designed to restrict your access to encrypted media and by
allowing others to change it, they will produce more powerful and
reliable software for restricting users like you. The software would
then be delivered to you in devices that do not allow you to change
it.
-</p>
-<p>This software might be open source and use the open source development
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ This software might be open source and use the open source development
model, but it won’t be free software since it won’t respect the
freedom of the users that actually run it. If the open source
development model succeeds in making this software more powerful and
reliable for restricting you, that will make it even worse.
-<a name="index-DRM_002c-open-source-and-1"></a>
-<a name="index-open-source_002c-DRM-and-1"></a>
-</p>
-<a name="Fear-of-Freedom"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Fear of Freedom </h3>
-
-<a name="index-open-source_002c-and-fear-of-freedom"></a>
-<a name="index-_0060_0060open-source_002c_0027_0027-values-of-5"></a>
-<a name="index-citizen-values_002c-convenience-v_002e-4"></a>
-<p>The main initial motivation of those who split off the open source
+ <a name="index-DRM_002c-open-source-and-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-open-source_002c-DRM-and-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <a name="Fear-of-Freedom">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Fear of Freedom
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-open-source_002c-and-fear-of-freedom">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-_0060_0060open-source_002c_0027_0027-values-of-5">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-citizen-values_002c-convenience-v_002e-4">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The main initial motivation of those who split off the open source
camp from the free software movement was that the ethical ideas of
“free software” made some people uneasy. That’s true: raising
ethical issues such as freedom, talking about responsibilities as well
@@ -335,15 +411,18 @@ prefer to ignore, such as whether their conduct is
ethical. This can
trigger discomfort, and some people may simply close their minds to
it. It does not follow that we ought to stop talking about these
issues.
-<a name="index-free-software-movement-_0028see-also-GNU-Project_0029-1"></a>
-</p>
-<p>That is, however, what the leaders of open source decided to do. They
+ <a name="index-free-software-movement-_0028see-also-GNU-Project_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ That is, however, what the leaders of open source decided to do. They
figured that by keeping quiet about ethics and freedom, and talking
only about the immediate practical benefits of certain free software,
they might be able to “sell” the software more effectively to
certain users, especially business.
-</p>
-<p>This approach has proved effective, in its own terms. The rhetoric of
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ This approach has proved effective, in its own terms. The rhetoric of
open source has convinced many businesses and individuals to use, and
even develop, free software, which has extended our community—but
only at the superficial, practical level. The philosophy of open
@@ -353,8 +432,9 @@ community, but does not teach them to defend it. That is
good, as far
as it goes, but it is not enough to make freedom secure. Attracting
users to free software takes them just part of the way to becoming
defenders of their own freedom.
-</p>
-<p>Sooner or later these users will be invited to switch back to
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Sooner or later these users will be invited to switch back to
proprietary software for some practical advantage. Countless companies
seek to offer such temptation, some even offering copies gratis. Why
would users decline? Only if they have learned to value the freedom
@@ -364,15 +444,17 @@ software. To spread this idea, we have to talk about
freedom. A
certain amount of the “keep quiet” approach to business can be
useful for the community, but it is dangerous if it becomes so common
that the love of freedom comes to seem like an eccentricity.
-</p>
-<p>That dangerous situation is exactly what we have. Most people involved
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ That dangerous situation is exactly what we have. Most people involved
with free software, especially its distributors, say little about
freedom—usually because they seek to be “more acceptable to
business.” Nearly all GNU/Linux operating system distributions add
proprietary packages to the basic free system, and they invite users
to consider this an advantage rather than a flaw.
-</p>
-<p>Proprietary add-on software and partially nonfree GNU/Linux
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Proprietary add-on software and partially nonfree GNU/Linux
distributions find fertile ground because most of our community does
not insist on freedom with its software. This is no coincidence. Most
GNU/Linux users were introduced to the system through “open source”
@@ -380,58 +462,122 @@ discussion, which doesn’t say that freedom is a goal.
The practices
that don’t uphold freedom and the words that don’t talk about freedom
go hand in hand, each promoting the other. To overcome this tendency,
we need more, not less, talk about freedom.
-<a name="index-open-source_002c-and-fear-of-freedom-1"></a>
-<a name="index-_0060_0060open-source_002c_0027_0027-values-of-6"></a>
-<a name="index-citizen-values_002c-convenience-v_002e-5"></a>
-</p>
-<a name="Conclusion-1"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Conclusion </h3>
-
-<a name="index-call-to-action_002c-teach-others-to-value-freedom-1"></a>
-<p>As the advocates of open source draw new users into our community, we
+ <a name="index-open-source_002c-and-fear-of-freedom-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-_0060_0060open-source_002c_0027_0027-values-of-6">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-citizen-values_002c-convenience-v_002e-5">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <a name="Conclusion-1">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Conclusion
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-teach-others-to-value-freedom-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ As the advocates of open source draw new users into our community, we
free software activists must shoulder the task of bringing the issue
of freedom to their attention. We have to say, “It’s free software
and it gives you freedom!”—more and louder than ever. Every time
you say “free software” rather than “open source,” you help our
campaign.
-</p>
-<a name="Notes"></a>
-<h4 class="subsubheading"> Notes </h4>
-
-<ul><li>
-<a name="index-Barr_002c-Joe"></a>
-Joe Barr’s article “Live and Let License” (ITworld.com, 22 May 2001, <a
href="http://www.itworld.com/LWD010523vcontrol4";>http://www.itworld.com/LWD010523vcontrol4</a>)
gives his perspective on this issue.
-</li><li>
-<a name="index-Lakhani_002c-Karim-R_002e"></a>
-Karim R. Lakhani and
-<a name="index-Wolf_002c-Robert-G_002e"></a>
-Robert G. Wolf’s paper on the motivation of free
-software developers (“Why
-<a name="index-hackers-6"></a>
-Hackers Do What They Do: Understanding
+ </p>
+ <a name="Notes">
+ </a>
+ <h4 class="subsubheading">
+ Notes
+ </h4>
+ <ul>
+ <li>
+ <a name="index-Barr_002c-Joe">
+ </a>
+ Joe Barr’s article “Live and Let License” (ITworld.com, 22 May 2001,
+ <a href="http://www.itworld.com/LWD010523vcontrol4";>
+ http://www.itworld.com/LWD010523vcontrol4
+ </a>
+ ) gives his perspective on this issue.
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ <a name="index-Lakhani_002c-Karim-R_002e">
+ </a>
+ Karim R. Lakhani and
+ <a name="index-Wolf_002c-Robert-G_002e">
+ </a>
+ Robert G. Wolf’s paper on the motivation of free
+software developers (“Why
+ <a name="index-hackers-6">
+ </a>
+ Hackers Do What They Do: Understanding
Motivation and Effort in Free/Open Source Software Projects,” in
-<cite>Perspectives on Free and Open Source Software,</cite> edited by J. Feller
+ <cite>
+ Perspectives on Free and Open Source Software,
+ </cite>
+ edited by J. Feller
and others (Cambridge: MIT Press, 2005)) says that a considerable
fraction are motivated by the view that software should be free. This
-is despite the fact that they surveyed the developers on
-<a name="index-SourceForge"></a>
-SourceForge,
+is despite the fact that they surveyed the developers on
+ <a name="index-SourceForge">
+ </a>
+ SourceForge,
a site that does not support the view that this is an ethical issue.
-</li></ul><a name="index-terminology_002c-importance-of-using-correct-4"></a>
-<a name="index-_0060_0060open-source_002c_0027_0027-values-of-7"></a>
-<div class="footnote">
-<hr><h3>Footnotes</h3>
-<h3><a name="FOOT29" href="#DOCF29">(29)</a></h3>
-<p>See
-<a href="http://opensource.org/docs/osd";>http://opensource.org/docs/osd</a>
for the full definition.
-</p><h3><a name="FOOT30" href="#DOCF30">(30)</a></h3>
-<p>Neal
-Stephenson, <cite>In the Beginning...Was the Command Line</cite> (New York:
+ </li>
+ </ul>
+ <a name="index-terminology_002c-importance-of-using-correct-4">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-_0060_0060open-source_002c_0027_0027-values-of-7">
+ </a>
+ <div class="footnote">
+ <hr>
+ <h3>
+ Footnotes
+ </h3>
+ <h3>
+ <a href="#DOCF29" name="FOOT29">
+ (29)
+ </a>
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ See
+ <a href="http://opensource.org/docs/osd";>
+ http://opensource.org/docs/osd
+ </a>
+ for the full definition.
+ </p>
+ <h3>
+ <a href="#DOCF30" name="FOOT30">
+ (30)
+ </a>
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ Neal
+Stephenson,
+ <cite>
+ In the Beginning...Was the Command Line
+ </cite>
+ (New York:
HarperCollins Publishers, 1999), p. 94.
-</p><h3><a name="FOOT31" href="#DOCF31">(31)</a></h3>
-<p>Mary Jane
-Irwin, “The Brave New World of Open-Source Game Design,” <cite>New
-York Times,</cite> online ed., 7 February 2009,
-<a
href="http://www.nytimes.com/external/gigaom/2009/02/07/07gigaom-the-brave-new-world-of-open-source-game-design-37415.html";>http://www.nytimes.com/external/gigaom/2009/02/07/07gigaom-the-brave-new-world-of-open-source-game-design-37415.html</a>.
-</p></div>
-<hr size="2"></section></body></html>
+ </p>
+ <h3>
+ <a href="#DOCF31" name="FOOT31">
+ (31)
+ </a>
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ Mary Jane
+Irwin, “The Brave New World of Open-Source Game Design,”
+ <cite>
+ New
+York Times,
+ </cite>
+ online ed., 7 February 2009,
+ <a
href="http://www.nytimes.com/external/gigaom/2009/02/07/07gigaom-the-brave-new-world-of-open-source-game-design-37415.html";>
+
http://www.nytimes.com/external/gigaom/2009/02/07/07gigaom-the-brave-new-world-of-open-source-game-design-37415.html
+ </a>
+ .
+ </p>
+ </hr>
+ </div>
+ <hr size="2"/>
+</section>
diff --git a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_15.html
b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_15.html
index cf2b355..5a7943a 100644
--- a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_15.html
+++ b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_15.html
@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
-<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/loose.dtd";>
-<html><!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
+<!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
Free Software Foundation
@@ -19,59 +18,43 @@ ISBN 978-0-9831592-0-9
Cover design by Rob Myers.
Cover photograph by Peter Hinely.
- --><!-- Created on February 18, 2016 by texi2html 1.82
-texi2html was written by:
- Lionel Cons <address@hidden> (original author)
- Karl Berry <address@hidden>
- Olaf Bachmann <address@hidden>
- and many others.
-Maintained by: Many creative people.
-Send bugs and suggestions to <address@hidden>
---><head><title>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 15. Did You Say
``Intellectual Property''? It's a Seductive Mirage</title><meta
name="description" content="This is the second edition of Richard Stallman's
collection of essays."><meta name="keywords" content="Free Software, Free
Society, 2nd ed.: 15. Did You Say ``Intellectual Property''? It's a Seductive
Mirage"><meta name="resource-type" content="document"><meta name="distribution"
content="global"><meta name="Generator" content=" [...]
-<!--
-a.summary-letter {text-decoration: none}
-blockquote.smallquotation {font-size: smaller}
-pre.display {font-family: serif}
-pre.format {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-comment {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-preformatted {font-family: serif}
-pre.smalldisplay {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallexample {font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallformat {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smalllisp {font-size: smaller}
-span.roman {font-family:serif; font-weight:normal;}
-span.sansserif {font-family:sans-serif; font-weight:normal;}
-ul.toc {list-style: none}
--->
-</style><link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
href="../static/web-common/style.css"></head><body lang="en" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
text="#000000" link="#0000FF" vlink="#800080" alink="#FF0000" class="article">
+ -->
-<a name="OS-Misses-Point"></a>
-<header><div id="logo"><a href="/"><img src="../static/gnu.svg" height="100"
width="100"></a></div><h1 class="book-title">Free Software, Free Society, 2nd
ed.</h1></header><section id="main"><a name="not-ipr"></a>
-<h1 class="chapter"> 15. Did You Say ``Intellectual Property''? It's a
Seductive Mirage</h1>
-
-<p>It has become fashionable to toss copyright, patents, and
+<section id="main">
+ <a name="not-ipr">
+ </a>
+ <h1 class="chapter">
+ 15. Did You Say ``Intellectual Property''? It's a Seductive Mirage
+ </h1>
+ <p>
+ It has become fashionable to toss copyright, patents, and
trademarks—three separate and different entities involving three
separate and different sets of laws—plus a dozen other laws into
one pot and call it “intellectual property.” The
distorting and confusing term did not become common by accident.
Companies that gain from the confusion promoted it. The clearest way
out of the confusion is to reject the term entirely.
-</p>
-<p>According to Professor
-<a name="index-Lemley_002c-Mark"></a>
-Mark Lemley, now of the
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ According to Professor
+ <a name="index-Lemley_002c-Mark">
+ </a>
+ Mark Lemley, now of the
Stanford Law School,
the widespread use of the term “intellectual property” is
a fashion that followed the 1967 founding of the
-<a
name="index-World-_0060_0060Intellectual-Property_0027_0027-Organization-_0028WIPO_0029-_0028see-also-_0060_0060intellectual-property_0027_0027_0029"></a>
-World “Intellectual
+ <a
name="index-World-_0060_0060Intellectual-Property_0027_0027-Organization-_0028WIPO_0029-_0028see-also-_0060_0060intellectual-property_0027_0027_0029">
+ </a>
+ World “Intellectual
Property” Organization (WIPO), and only became really common in recent
years. (WIPO is formally a
-<a name="index-UN-_0028United-Nations_0029"></a>
-UN organization, but in fact represents the
+ <a name="index-UN-_0028United-Nations_0029">
+ </a>
+ UN organization, but in fact represents the
interests of the holders of copyrights, patents, and trademarks.)
-</p>
-<p>The term carries a bias that is not hard to see: it suggests thinking
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The term carries a bias that is not hard to see: it suggests thinking
about copyright, patents and trademarks by analogy with property
rights for physical objects. (This analogy is at odds with the legal
philosophies of copyright law, of patent law, and of trademark law,
@@ -80,50 +63,58 @@ physical property law, but use of this term leads
legislators to
change them to be more so. Since that is the change desired by the
companies that exercise copyright, patent and trademark powers, the
bias introduced by the term “intellectual property” suits them.
-</p>
-<p>The bias is reason enough to reject the term, and people have often
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The bias is reason enough to reject the term, and people have often
asked me to propose some other name for the overall category—or
have proposed their own alternatives (often humorous). Suggestions
include IMPs, for Imposed Monopoly Privileges, and GOLEMs, for
Government-Originated Legally Enforced Monopolies. Some speak of
“exclusive rights regimes,” but referring to restrictions
as “rights” is doublethink too.
-</p>
-<p>Some of these alternative names would be an improvement, but it is a
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Some of these alternative names would be an improvement, but it is a
mistake to replace “intellectual property” with any other
term. A different name will not address the term’s deeper problem:
overgeneralization. There is no such unified thing as
“intellectual property”—it is a mirage. The only
reason people think it makes sense as a coherent category is that
widespread use of the term has misled them.
-</p>
-<p>The term “intellectual property” is at best a catch-all to
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The term “intellectual property” is at best a catch-all to
lump together disparate laws. Nonlawyers who hear one term applied to
these various laws tend to assume they are based on a common
principle and function similarly.
-</p>
-<p>Nothing could be further from the case.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Nothing could be further from the case.
These laws originated separately, evolved differently, cover different
activities, have different rules, and raise different public policy issues.
-</p>
-<p>Copyright law was designed to promote authorship and art, and covers
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Copyright law was designed to promote authorship and art, and covers
the details of expression of a work. Patent law was intended to
promote the publication of useful ideas, at the price of giving the
one who publishes an idea a temporary monopoly over it—a price
that may be worth paying in some fields and not in others.
-</p>
-<p>Trademark law, by contrast, was not intended to promote any particular
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Trademark law, by contrast, was not intended to promote any particular
way of acting, but simply to enable buyers to know what they are
buying. Legislators under the influence of the term “intellectual
property,” however, have turned it into a scheme that provides
incentives for advertising.
-</p>
-<p>Since these laws developed independently, they are different in every
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Since these laws developed independently, they are different in every
detail, as well as in their basic purposes and methods. Thus, if you
learn some fact about copyright law, you’d be wise to assume that
patent law is different. You’ll rarely go wrong!
-</p>
-<p>People often say “intellectual property” when they really
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ People often say “intellectual property” when they really
mean some larger or smaller category. For instance, rich countries
often impose unjust laws on poor countries to squeeze money out of
them. Some of these laws are “intellectual property” laws,
@@ -132,31 +123,35 @@ for that label because it has become familiar to them. By
using it,
they misrepresent the nature of the issue. It would be better to use
an accurate term, such as “legislative colonization,” that
gets to the heart of the matter.
-</p>
-<p>Laymen are not alone in being confused by this term. Even law
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Laymen are not alone in being confused by this term. Even law
professors who teach these laws are lured and distracted by the
seductiveness of the term “intellectual property,” and
make general statements that conflict with facts they know. For
example, one professor wrote in 2006:
-</p>
-<blockquote class="smallquotation">
-<p>Unlike their descendants who now work the floor at WIPO, the framers
+ </p>
+ <blockquote class="smallquotation">
+ <p>
+ Unlike their descendants who now work the floor at WIPO, the framers
of the US constitution had a principled, procompetitive attitude to
intellectual property. They knew rights might be necessary,
but…they tied congress’s hands, restricting its power in
multiple ways.
-</p>
-</blockquote>
-
-<p>That statement refers to Article I, Section 8, Clause 8, of the
-<a
name="index-Constitution_002c-copyright-law_002c-trademark-law_002c-patent-law_002c-and-US"></a>
-US
+ </p>
+ </blockquote>
+ <p>
+ That statement refers to Article I, Section 8, Clause 8, of the
+ <a
name="index-Constitution_002c-copyright-law_002c-trademark-law_002c-patent-law_002c-and-US">
+ </a>
+ US
Constitution, which authorizes copyright law and patent law. That
clause, though, has nothing to do with trademark law or various
others. The term “intellectual property” led that
professor to make false generalization.
-</p>
-<p>The term “intellectual property” also leads to simplistic
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The term “intellectual property” also leads to simplistic
thinking. It leads people to focus on the meager commonality in form
that these disparate laws have—that they create artificial
privileges for certain parties—and to disregard the details
@@ -164,16 +159,19 @@ which form their substance: the specific restrictions
each law places
on the public, and the consequences that result. This simplistic focus
on the form encourages an “economistic” approach to all
these issues.
-</p>
-<a
name="index-citizen-values_002c-production-v_002e-freedom-and-way-of-life"></a>
-<p>Economics operates here, as it often does, as a vehicle for unexamined
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-citizen-values_002c-production-v_002e-freedom-and-way-of-life">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Economics operates here, as it often does, as a vehicle for unexamined
assumptions. These include assumptions about values, such as that
amount of production matters while freedom and way of life do not,
and factual assumptions which are mostly false, such as that
copyrights on music supports musicians, or that patents on drugs
support life-saving research.
-</p>
-<p>Another problem is that, at the broad scale implicit in the term
“intellectual
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Another problem is that, at the broad scale implicit in the term
“intellectual
property,” the specific issues raised by the various laws become
nearly invisible. These issues arise from the specifics of each
law—precisely what the term “intellectual property”
@@ -183,30 +181,37 @@ has nothing to do with this. Patent law raises issues
such as whether
poor countries should be allowed to produce life-saving drugs and sell
them cheaply to save lives; copyright law has nothing to do with such
matters.
-</p>
-<p>Neither of these issues is solely economic in nature, and their
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Neither of these issues is solely economic in nature, and their
noneconomic aspects are very different; using the shallow economic
overgeneralization as the basis for considering them means ignoring the
differences. Putting the two laws in the “intellectual
property” pot obstructs clear thinking about each one.
-</p>
-<p>Thus, any opinions about “the issue of intellectual
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Thus, any opinions about “the issue of intellectual
property” and any generalizations about this supposed category
are almost surely foolish. If you think all those laws are one issue,
you will tend to choose your opinions from a selection of sweeping
overgeneralizations, none of which is any good.
-</p>
-<a
name="index-call-to-action_002c-use-correct-terminology-_0028see-also-terminology_0029"></a>
-<p>If you want to think clearly about the issues raised by patents, or
+ </p>
+ <a
name="index-call-to-action_002c-use-correct-terminology-_0028see-also-terminology_0029">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ If you want to think clearly about the issues raised by patents, or
copyrights, or trademarks, or various other different laws, the first
step is to forget the idea of lumping them together, and treat them as
separate topics. The second step is to reject the narrow perspectives
and simplistic picture the term “intellectual property”
suggests. Consider each of these issues separately, in its fullness,
and you have a chance of considering them well.
-</p>
-<a
name="index-World-_0060_0060Intellectual-Property_0027_0027-Organization-_0028WIPO_0029-_0028see-also-_0060_0060intellectual-property_0027_0027_0029-1"></a>
-<p>And when it comes to reforming WIPO, among other things
+ </p>
+ <a
name="index-World-_0060_0060Intellectual-Property_0027_0027-Organization-_0028WIPO_0029-_0028see-also-_0060_0060intellectual-property_0027_0027_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ And when it comes to reforming WIPO, among other things
let’s call for changing its name.
-</p>
- <hr size="2"></section></body></html>
+ </p>
+ <hr size="2"/>
+</section>
diff --git a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_16.html
b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_16.html
index 792d97b..9dae575 100644
--- a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_16.html
+++ b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_16.html
@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
-<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/loose.dtd";>
-<html><!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
+<!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
Free Software Foundation
@@ -19,424 +18,568 @@ ISBN 978-0-9831592-0-9
Cover design by Rob Myers.
Cover photograph by Peter Hinely.
- --><!-- Created on February 18, 2016 by texi2html 1.82
-texi2html was written by:
- Lionel Cons <address@hidden> (original author)
- Karl Berry <address@hidden>
- Olaf Bachmann <address@hidden>
- and many others.
-Maintained by: Many creative people.
-Send bugs and suggestions to <address@hidden>
---><head><title>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 16. Words to Avoid (or
Use with Care)
-Because They Are Loaded or Confusing</title><meta name="description"
content="This is the second edition of Richard Stallman's collection of
essays."><meta name="keywords" content="Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.:
16. Words to Avoid (or Use with Care)
-Because They Are Loaded or Confusing"><meta name="resource-type"
content="document"><meta name="distribution" content="global"><meta
name="Generator" content="texi2html 1.82"><meta http-equiv="Content-Type"
content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><style type="text/css">
-<!--
-a.summary-letter {text-decoration: none}
-blockquote.smallquotation {font-size: smaller}
-pre.display {font-family: serif}
-pre.format {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-comment {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-preformatted {font-family: serif}
-pre.smalldisplay {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallexample {font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallformat {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smalllisp {font-size: smaller}
-span.roman {font-family:serif; font-weight:normal;}
-span.sansserif {font-family:sans-serif; font-weight:normal;}
-ul.toc {list-style: none}
--->
-</style><link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
href="../static/web-common/style.css"></head><body lang="en" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
text="#000000" link="#0000FF" vlink="#800080" alink="#FF0000" class="article">
-
-<a name="Words-to-Avoid"></a>
-<header><div id="logo"><a href="/"><img src="../static/gnu.svg" height="100"
width="100"></a></div><h1 class="book-title">Free Software, Free Society, 2nd
ed.</h1></header><section id="main"><a
name="Words-to-Avoid-_0028or-Use-with-Care_0029--Because-They-Are-Loaded-or-Confusing"></a>
-<h1 class="chapter"> 16. Words to Avoid (or Use with Care) <br>Because They
Are Loaded or Confusing </h1>
-
-<a
name="index-call-to-action_002c-use-correct-terminology-_0028see-also-terminology_0029-7"></a>
-<a name="index-terminology_002c-importance-of-using-correct-7"></a>
-<p>There are a number of words and phrases that we recommend avoiding, or
+ -->
+
+<section id="main">
+ <a
name="Words-to-Avoid-_0028or-Use-with-Care_0029--Because-They-Are-Loaded-or-Confusing">
+ </a>
+ <h1 class="chapter">
+ 16. Words to Avoid (or Use with Care)
+ <br>
+ Because They Are Loaded or Confusing
+ </br>
+ </h1>
+ <a
name="index-call-to-action_002c-use-correct-terminology-_0028see-also-terminology_0029-7">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-terminology_002c-importance-of-using-correct-7">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ There are a number of words and phrases that we recommend avoiding, or
avoiding in certain contexts and usages. Some are ambiguous or
misleading; others presuppose a viewpoint that we hope you disagree
with. (See also “Categories of Free and Nonfree Software,” on
address@hidden)
-</p>
-<a name="BSD_002dStyle"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> BSD-Style </h3>
-
-<a name="index-_0060_0060BSD_002dstyle_002c_0027_0027-problematic-term"></a>
-<p>The expression “BSD-style license” leads to confusion because it
+ </p>
+ <a name="BSD_002dStyle">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ BSD-Style
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-_0060_0060BSD_002dstyle_002c_0027_0027-problematic-term">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The expression “BSD-style license” leads to confusion because it
lumps together licenses that have important differences. For instance,
the original
-<a
name="index-BSD-licenses-_0028see-also-both-_0060_0060BSD_002dstyle_0027_0027-and-GPL_0029-1"></a>
-<a name="index-GPL_002c-BSD-license-and"></a>
-BSD license with the advertising clause is incompatible with the GNU
+ <a
name="index-BSD-licenses-_0028see-also-both-_0060_0060BSD_002dstyle_0027_0027-and-GPL_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GPL_002c-BSD-license-and">
+ </a>
+ BSD license with the advertising clause is incompatible with the GNU
General Public License, but the revised BSD license is compatible with
the GPL.
-</p>
-<p>To avoid confusion, it is best to name the specific license in
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ To avoid confusion, it is best to name the specific license in
question and avoid the vague term “BSD-style.”
-</p>
-<a name="Closed"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Closed </h3>
-
-<a name="index-_0060_0060closed_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term"></a>
-<p>Describing nonfree software as “closed” clearly refers to the term
+ </p>
+ <a name="Closed">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Closed
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-_0060_0060closed_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Describing nonfree software as “closed” clearly refers to the term
“open source.” In the free software movement, we do not want to be
confused with the open source camp, so we are careful to avoid saying
things that would encourage people to lump us in with them. For
instance, we avoid describing nonfree software as “closed.” We call
it “nonfree” or “proprietary.”
-</p>
-<p>@vglue address@hidden
-<a name="Cloud-Computing"></a>
-</p><h3 class="subheading"> Cloud Computing </h3>
-
-<a name="index-_0060_0060cloud-computing_002c_0027_0027-avoid-use-of-term"></a>
-<p>The term “cloud computing” is a marketing buzzword with no clear
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ @vglue address@hidden
+ <a name="Cloud-Computing">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Cloud Computing
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-_0060_0060cloud-computing_002c_0027_0027-avoid-use-of-term">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The term “cloud computing” is a marketing buzzword with no clear
meaning. It is used for a range of different activities whose only
common characteristic is that they use the Internet for something
beyond transmitting files. Thus, the term is a nexus of confusion. If
you base your thinking on it, your thinking will be vague.
-</p>
-<p>When thinking about or responding to a statement someone else has made
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ When thinking about or responding to a statement someone else has made
using this term, the first step is to clarify the topic. Which kind of
activity is the statement really about, and what is a good, clear term
for that activity? Once the topic is clear, the discussion can head
for a useful conclusion.
-</p>
-<p>Curiously,
-<a name="index-Ellison_002c-Larry"></a>
-Larry Ellison, a proprietary software
-<a name="index-developers_002c-proprietary-software-2"></a>
-developer, also noted the vacuity of the term “cloud
-computing.”<a name="DOCF32" href="#FOOT32">(32)</a>He decided to use the term
anyway
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Curiously,
+ <a name="index-Ellison_002c-Larry">
+ </a>
+ Larry Ellison, a proprietary software
+ <a name="index-developers_002c-proprietary-software-2">
+ </a>
+ developer, also noted the vacuity of the term “cloud
+computing.”
+ <a href="#FOOT32" name="DOCF32">
+ (32)
+ </a>
+ He decided to use the term anyway
address@hidden@parbecause, as a proprietary software developer, he isn’t
motivated by
the same ideals as we are.
-</p>
-<a name="Commercial"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Commercial </h3>
-
-<a name="index-commercial-software-_0028see-also-software_0029-1"></a>
-<a
name="index-_0060_0060commercial_002c_0027_0027-problematic-use-of-term"></a>
-<a
name="index-software_002c-commercial-_0028see-also-commercial-software_0029-1"></a>
-<p>Please don’t use “commercial” as a synonym for “nonfree.” That
+ </p>
+ <a name="Commercial">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Commercial
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-commercial-software-_0028see-also-software_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-_0060_0060commercial_002c_0027_0027-problematic-use-of-term">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-software_002c-commercial-_0028see-also-commercial-software_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Please don’t use “commercial” as a synonym for “nonfree.” That
confuses two entirely different issues.
-</p>
-<p>A program is commercial if it is developed as a business activity. A
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ A program is commercial if it is developed as a business activity. A
commercial program can be free or nonfree, depending on its manner of
distribution. Likewise, a program developed by a school or an
individual can be free or nonfree, depending on its manner of
distribution. The two questions—what sort of entity developed the
program and what freedom its users have—are independent.
-</p>
-<a name="index-universities-1"></a>
-<p>In the first decade of the free software movement, free software
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-universities-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ In the first decade of the free software movement, free software
packages were almost always noncommercial; the components of the
GNU/Linux operating system were developed by individuals or by
nonprofit organizations such as the FSF and universities. Later, in
the 1990s, free commercial software started to appear.
-</p>
-<p>Free commercial software is a contribution to our community, so we
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Free commercial software is a contribution to our community, so we
should encourage it. But people who think that “commercial” means
“nonfree” will tend to think that the “free commercial”
combination is self-contradictory, and dismiss the possibility. Let’s
be careful not to use the word “commercial” in that way.
-</p>
-<a name="Compensation"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Compensation </h3>
-
-<a
name="index-_0060_0060compensation_002c_0027_0027-false-assumptions-connected-to-term"></a>
-<a
name="index-copyright_002c-false-assumptions-related-to-_0060_0060compensation_0027_0027-for-authors"></a>
-<p>To speak of “compensation for authors” in connection with copyright
+ </p>
+ <a name="Compensation">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Compensation
+ </h3>
+ <a
name="index-_0060_0060compensation_002c_0027_0027-false-assumptions-connected-to-term">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-copyright_002c-false-assumptions-related-to-_0060_0060compensation_0027_0027-for-authors">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ To speak of “compensation for authors” in connection with copyright
carries the assumptions that (1) copyright exists for the sake of
authors and (2) whenever we read something, we take on a debt to the
author which we must then repay. The first assumption is simply false,
and the second is outrageous.
-</p>
-<a name="Consumer"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Consumer </h3>
-
-<a
name="index-_0060_0060consumer_002c_0027_0027-problematic-use-of-term-_0028see-also-_0060_0060open-source_0027_0027_0029"></a>
-<p>The term “consumer,” when used to refer to computer users, is loaded
+ </p>
+ <a name="Consumer">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Consumer
+ </h3>
+ <a
name="index-_0060_0060consumer_002c_0027_0027-problematic-use-of-term-_0028see-also-_0060_0060open-source_0027_0027_0029">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The term “consumer,” when used to refer to computer users, is loaded
with assumptions we should reject. Playing a digital recording, or
running a program, does not consume it.
-</p>
-<p>The terms “producer” and “consumer” come from economic theory, and
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The terms “producer” and “consumer” come from economic theory, and
bring with them its narrow perspective and misguided assumptions. They
tend to warp your thinking.
-</p>
-<p>In addition, describing the users of software as “consumers”
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ In addition, describing the users of software as “consumers”
presumes a narrow role for them: it regards them as cattle that
passively graze on what others make available to them.
-</p>
-<p>This kind of thinking leads to travesties like the
-<a
name="index-Consumer-Broadband-and-Digital-Television-Promotion-Act-_0028CBDTPA_0029"></a>
-CBDTPA, the “Consumer Broadband and Digital Television Promotion Act,”
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ This kind of thinking leads to travesties like the
+ <a
name="index-Consumer-Broadband-and-Digital-Television-Promotion-Act-_0028CBDTPA_0029">
+ </a>
+ CBDTPA, the “Consumer Broadband and Digital Television Promotion Act,”
which would require copying restriction facilities in every digital
device. If all the users do is “consume,” then why should they mind?
-</p>
-<p>The shallow economic conception of users as “consumers” tends to go
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The shallow economic conception of users as “consumers” tends to go
hand in hand with the idea that published works are mere “content.”
-</p>
-<p>To describe people who are not limited to passive use of works, we
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ To describe people who are not limited to passive use of works, we
suggest terms such as “individuals” and “citizens.”
-</p>
-<a name="Content"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Content </h3>
-
-<a name="index-_0060_0060content_002c_0027_0027-problematic-use-of-term"></a>
-<p>If you want to describe a feeling of comfort and satisfaction, by all
+ </p>
+ <a name="Content">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Content
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-_0060_0060content_002c_0027_0027-problematic-use-of-term">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ If you want to describe a feeling of comfort and satisfaction, by all
means say you are “content,” but using the word as a noun to
describe written and other works of authorship adopts an attitude you
might rather avoid. It regards these works as a commodity whose
purpose is to fill a box and make money. In effect, it disparages the
works themselves.
-</p>
-<p>Those who use this term are often the publishers that push for
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Those who use this term are often the publishers that push for
increased copyright power in the name of the authors (“creators,” as
they say) of the works. The term “content” reveals their real
attitude towards these works and their authors. (See
-<a name="index-Love_002c-Courtney"></a>
-Courtney
-Love’s open letter to
-<a name="index-Case_002c-Steve"></a>
-Steve Case<a name="DOCF33" href="#FOOT33">(33)</a>
-and search for “content provider” in that page. Alas, Ms. Love is
-unaware that the term
-<a
name="index-_0060_0060intellectual-property_002c_0027_0027-bias-and-fallacy-of-term-_0028see-also-ownership_0029-5"></a>
-“intellectual property” is also biased and confusing.)
-</p>
-<p>However, as long as other people use the term “content provider,”
+ <a name="index-Love_002c-Courtney">
+ </a>
+ Courtney
+Love’s open letter to
+ <a name="index-Case_002c-Steve">
+ </a>
+ Steve Case
+ <a href="#FOOT33" name="DOCF33">
+ (33)
+ </a>
+ and search for “content provider” in that page. Alas, Ms. Love is
+unaware that the term
+ <a
name="index-_0060_0060intellectual-property_002c_0027_0027-bias-and-fallacy-of-term-_0028see-also-ownership_0029-5">
+ </a>
+ “intellectual property” is also biased and confusing.)
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ However, as long as other people use the term “content provider,”
political dissidents can well call themselves “malcontent
providers.”
-</p>
-<p>The term “content management” takes the prize for vacuity.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The term “content management” takes the prize for vacuity.
“Content” means “some sort of information,” and “management” in
this context means “doing something with it.” So a “content
management system” is a system for doing something to some sort of
information. Nearly all programs fit that description.
-</p>
-<p>In most cases, that term really refers to a system for updating pages
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ In most cases, that term really refers to a system for updating pages
on a web site. For that, we recommend the term “web site revision
system” (WRS).
-</p>
-<a name="Creator"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Creator </h3>
-
-<a name="index-copyright_002c-_0060_0060creator_0027_0027"></a>
-<a name="index-_0060_0060creator_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term"></a>
-<p>The term “creator” as applied to authors implicitly compares them to
+ </p>
+ <a name="Creator">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Creator
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-copyright_002c-_0060_0060creator_0027_0027">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-_0060_0060creator_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The term “creator” as applied to authors implicitly compares them to
a deity (“the creator”). The term is used by publishers to elevate
authors’ moral standing above that of ordinary people in order to
justify giving them increased copyright power, which the publishers
can then exercise in their name. We recommend saying “author”
instead. However, in many cases “copyright holder” is what you
really mean.
-</p>
-<a name="Digital-Goods"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Digital Goods </h3>
-
-<a name="index-_0060_0060digital-goods_002c_0027_0027-problematic-term"></a>
-<p>The term “digital goods,” as applied to copies of works of
+ </p>
+ <a name="Digital-Goods">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Digital Goods
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-_0060_0060digital-goods_002c_0027_0027-problematic-term">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The term “digital goods,” as applied to copies of works of
authorship, erroneously identifies them with physical goods—which
cannot be copied, and which therefore have to be manufactured and
sold.
-</p>
-<a name="Digital-Rights-Management"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Digital Rights Management </h3>
-
-<a
name="index-DRM_002c-call-it-_0060_0060Digital-Restrictions-Management_0027_0027"></a>
-<a
name="index-_0060_0060Digital-Rights-Management_002c_0027_0027-avoid-use-of-term-_0028see-also-DRM_0029"></a>
-<p>“Digital Rights Management” refers to technical schemes designed to
+ </p>
+ <a name="Digital-Rights-Management">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Digital Rights Management
+ </h3>
+ <a
name="index-DRM_002c-call-it-_0060_0060Digital-Restrictions-Management_0027_0027">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-_0060_0060Digital-Rights-Management_002c_0027_0027-avoid-use-of-term-_0028see-also-DRM_0029">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ “Digital Rights Management” refers to technical schemes designed to
impose restrictions on computer users. The use of the word “rights”
in this term is propaganda, designed to lead you unawares into seeing
the issue from the viewpoint of the few that impose the restrictions,
and ignoring that of the general public on whom these restrictions are
imposed.
-</p>
-<p>Good alternatives include “Digital Restrictions Management,” and
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Good alternatives include “Digital Restrictions Management,” and
“digital handcuffs.”
-</p>
-<a name="Ecosystem"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Ecosystem </h3>
-
-<a
name="index-_0060_0060ecosystem_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-description-of-free-software-community"></a>
-<p>It is a mistake to describe the free software community, or any human
+ </p>
+ <a name="Ecosystem">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Ecosystem
+ </h3>
+ <a
name="index-_0060_0060ecosystem_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-description-of-free-software-community">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ It is a mistake to describe the free software community, or any human
community, as an “ecosystem,” because that word implies the absence
of ethical judgment.
-</p>
-<p>The term “ecosystem” implicitly suggests an attitude of
-nonjudgmental observation: don’t ask how what <em>should</em> happen,
-just study and explain what <em>does</em> happen. In an ecosystem, some
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The term “ecosystem” implicitly suggests an attitude of
+nonjudgmental observation: don’t ask how what
+ <em>
+ should
+ </em>
+ happen,
+just study and explain what
+ <em>
+ does
+ </em>
+ happen. In an ecosystem, some
organisms consume other organisms. We do not ask whether it is fair
for an owl to eat a mouse or for a mouse to eat a plant, we only
observe that they do so. Species’ populations grow or shrink according
to the conditions; this is neither right nor wrong, merely an
ecological phenomenon.
-</p>
-<p>By contrast, beings that adopt an ethical stance towards their
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ By contrast, beings that adopt an ethical stance towards their
surroundings can decide to preserve things that, on their own, might
vanish—such as civil society, democracy, human rights, peace, public
health, clean air and water, endangered species, traditional
arts…and computer users’ freedom.
-</p>
-<a name="For-Free"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> For Free </h3>
-
-<a name="index-_0060_0060for-free_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term"></a>
-<p>If you want to say that a program is free software, please don’t say
+ </p>
+ <a name="For-Free">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ For Free
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-_0060_0060for-free_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ If you want to say that a program is free software, please don’t say
that it is available “for free.” That term specifically means “for
zero price.” Free software is a matter of freedom, not price.
-</p>
-<p>Free software copies are often available for free—for example, by
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Free software copies are often available for free—for example, by
downloading via FTP. But free software copies are also available for a
price on CD-ROMs; meanwhile, proprietary software copies are
occasionally available for free in promotions, and some proprietary
packages are normally available at no charge to certain users.
-</p>
-<p>To avoid confusion, you can say that the program is available
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ To avoid confusion, you can say that the program is available
“as free software.”
-</p>
-<a name="Freely-Available"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Freely Available </h3>
-
-<a
name="index-_0060_0060freely-available_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term"></a>
-<p>Don’t use “freely available software” as a synonym for “free
+ </p>
+ <a name="Freely-Available">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Freely Available
+ </h3>
+ <a
name="index-_0060_0060freely-available_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Don’t use “freely available software” as a synonym for “free
software.” The terms are not equivalent. Software is “freely
available” if anyone can easily get a copy. “Free software” is
defined in terms of the freedom of users that have a copy of it. These
are answers to different questions.
-</p>
-<a name="Freeware-1"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Freeware </h3>
-
-<a name="index-freeware-_0028see-also-software_0029-1"></a>
-<p>Please don’t use the term “freeware” as a synonym for “free
+ </p>
+ <a name="Freeware-1">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Freeware
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-freeware-_0028see-also-software_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Please don’t use the term “freeware” as a synonym for “free
software.” The term “freeware” was used often in the 1980s for
programs released only as executables, with source code not
available. Today it has no particular agreed-on definition.
-</p>
-<p>When using languages other than English, please avoid borrowing
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ When using languages other than English, please avoid borrowing
English terms such as “free software” or “freeware.” It is better
to translate the term “free software” into your language. (Please
see address@hidden Translations-pg}{ for a list of recommended unambiguous
translations for the term “free software” into various languages.)
-</p>
-<p>By using a word in your own language, you show that you are really
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ By using a word in your own language, you show that you are really
referring to freedom and not just parroting some mysterious foreign
marketing concept. The reference to freedom may at first seem strange
or disturbing to your compatriots, but once they see that it means
exactly what it says, they will really understand what the issue is.
-</p>
-<a name="Give-Away-Software"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Give Away Software </h3>
-
-<a
name="index-_0060_0060give-away-software_002c_0027_0027-misleading-use-of-term-1"></a>
-<p>It’s misleading to use the term “give away” to mean “distribute a
+ </p>
+ <a name="Give-Away-Software">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Give Away Software
+ </h3>
+ <a
name="index-_0060_0060give-away-software_002c_0027_0027-misleading-use-of-term-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ It’s misleading to use the term “give away” to mean “distribute a
program as free software.” This locution has the same problem as
“for free”: it implies the issue is price, not freedom. One way to
avoid the confusion is to say “release as free software.”
-</p>
-<a name="Hacker"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Hacker </h3>
-
-<a name="index-hackers-7"></a>
-<a
name="index-_0060_0060hacker_002c_0027_0027-actual-meaning-of-term-_0028see-also-_0060_0060cracker_0027_0027_0029-1"></a>
-<a name="index-MIT-5"></a>
-<p>A hacker is someone who enjoys playful cleverness<a name="DOCF34"
href="#FOOT34">(34)</a>—not
+ </p>
+ <a name="Hacker">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Hacker
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-hackers-7">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-_0060_0060hacker_002c_0027_0027-actual-meaning-of-term-_0028see-also-_0060_0060cracker_0027_0027_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-MIT-5">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ A hacker is someone who enjoys playful cleverness
+ <a href="#FOOT34" name="DOCF34">
+ (34)
+ </a>
+ —not
necessarily with computers. The programmers in the old MIT free
software community of the 60s and 70s referred to themselves as
hackers. Around 1980, journalists who discovered the hacker community
mistakenly took the term to mean “security breaker.”
-</p>
-<p>Please don’t spread this mistake. People who break security are
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Please don’t spread this mistake. People who break security are
“crackers.”
-</p>
-<a name="Intellectual-Property"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Intellectual Property </h3>
-
-<a
name="index-_0060_0060intellectual-property_002c_0027_0027-bias-and-fallacy-of-term-_0028see-also-ownership_0029-6"></a>
-<a name="index-trademarks-and_002for-trademark-law-1"></a>
-<p>Publishers and lawyers like to describe copyright as “intellectual
+ </p>
+ <a name="Intellectual-Property">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Intellectual Property
+ </h3>
+ <a
name="index-_0060_0060intellectual-property_002c_0027_0027-bias-and-fallacy-of-term-_0028see-also-ownership_0029-6">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-trademarks-and_002for-trademark-law-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Publishers and lawyers like to describe copyright as “intellectual
property”—a term also applied to patents, trademarks, and other
more obscure areas of law. These laws have so little in common, and
differ so much, that it is ill-advised to generalize about them. It is
best to talk specifically about “copyright,” or about “patents,”
or about “trademarks.”
-</p>
-<p>The term “intellectual property” carries a hidden assumption—that
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The term “intellectual property” carries a hidden assumption—that
the way to think about all these disparate issues is based on an
analogy with physical objects, and our conception of them as physical
property.
-</p>
-<p>When it comes to copying, this analogy disregards the crucial
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ When it comes to copying, this analogy disregards the crucial
difference between material objects and information: information can
be copied and shared almost effortlessly, while material objects can’t
be.
-</p>
-<p>To avoid spreading unnecessary bias and confusion, it is best to adopt
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ To avoid spreading unnecessary bias and confusion, it is best to adopt
a firm policy not to speak or even think in terms of “intellectual
property.”
-</p>
-<p>The hypocrisy of calling these powers “rights” is starting to make
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The hypocrisy of calling these powers “rights” is starting to make
the
-<a
name="index-World-_0060_0060Intellectual-Property_0027_0027-Organization-_0028WIPO_0029-_0028see-also-_0060_0060intellectual-property_0027_0027_0029-2"></a>
-World “Intellectual Property” Organization embarrassed.
-</p>
-<a name="LAMP-System"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> LAMP System </h3>
-
-<a
name="index-_0060_0060LAMP-system_002c_0027_0027-problematic-term-_0028see-also-GLAMP_0029"></a>
-<p>“LAMP” stands for “Linux, Apache, MySQL and PHP”—a common
+ <a
name="index-World-_0060_0060Intellectual-Property_0027_0027-Organization-_0028WIPO_0029-_0028see-also-_0060_0060intellectual-property_0027_0027_0029-2">
+ </a>
+ World “Intellectual Property” Organization embarrassed.
+ </p>
+ <a name="LAMP-System">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ LAMP System
+ </h3>
+ <a
name="index-_0060_0060LAMP-system_002c_0027_0027-problematic-term-_0028see-also-GLAMP_0029">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ “LAMP” stands for “Linux, Apache, MySQL and PHP”—a common
combination of software to use on a web server, except that “Linux”
in this context really refers to the GNU/Linux system. So instead of
“LAMP” it should be
-<a
name="index-GLAMP-_0028GNU_002c-Linux_002c-Apache_002c-MySQL-and-PHP_0029-system"></a>
-<a
name="index-GNU_002c-GLAMP-_0028GNU_002c-Linux_002c-Apache_002c-MySQL-and-PHP_0029-system"></a>
-“GLAMP”: “GNU, Linux, Apache, MySQL and PHP.”
-</p>
-<a name="Linux-System"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Linux System </h3>
-
-<a name="index-_0060_0060Linux-system_002c_0027_0027-avoid-use-of-term"></a>
-<a name="index-Torvalds_002c-Linus-1"></a>
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Project-7"></a>
-<a name="index-kernel_002c-Linux-1"></a>
-<a name="index-Linux-kernel-1"></a>
-<a
name="index-_0060_0060Linux_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term-_0028see-also-open-source_0029-3"></a>
-<p>Linux is the name of the kernel that Linus Torvalds developed starting
+ <a
name="index-GLAMP-_0028GNU_002c-Linux_002c-Apache_002c-MySQL-and-PHP_0029-system">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-GNU_002c-GLAMP-_0028GNU_002c-Linux_002c-Apache_002c-MySQL-and-PHP_0029-system">
+ </a>
+ “GLAMP”: “GNU, Linux, Apache, MySQL and PHP.”
+ </p>
+ <a name="Linux-System">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Linux System
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-_0060_0060Linux-system_002c_0027_0027-avoid-use-of-term">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Torvalds_002c-Linus-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Project-7">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-kernel_002c-Linux-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Linux-kernel-1">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-_0060_0060Linux_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term-_0028see-also-open-source_0029-3">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Linux is the name of the kernel that Linus Torvalds developed starting
in 1991. The operating system in which Linux is used is basically GNU
with Linux added. To call the whole system “Linux” is both unfair
and confusing. Please call the complete system GNU/Linux, both to give
the GNU Project credit and to distinguish the whole system from the
kernel alone.
-</p>
-<a name="Market"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Market </h3>
-
-<a name="index-_0060_0060market_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term"></a>
-<p>It is misleading to describe the users of free software, or the
+ </p>
+ <a name="Market">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Market
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-_0060_0060market_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ It is misleading to describe the users of free software, or the
software users in general, as a “market.”
-</p>
-<p>This is not to say there is no room for markets in the free software
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ This is not to say there is no room for markets in the free software
community. If you have a free software support business, then you
have clients, and you trade with them in a market. As long as you
respect their freedom, we wish you success in your market.
-</p>
-<p>But the free software movement is a social movement, not a business,
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ But the free software movement is a social movement, not a business,
and the success it aims for is not a market success. We are trying to
serve the public by giving it freedom—not competing to draw business
away from a rival. To equate this campaign for freedom to a business’
efforts for mere success is to deny the importance of freedom and
legitimize proprietary software.
-</p>
-<a name="MP3-Player"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> MP3 Player </h3>
-
-<a
name="index-_0060_0060MP3-Player_002c_0027_0027-problematic-use-of-term"></a>
-<a name="index-MP3-1"></a>
-<a name="index-Ogg-Vorbis"></a>
-<a name="index-FLAC"></a>
-<p>In the late 1990s it became feasible to make portable, solid-state
+ </p>
+ <a name="MP3-Player">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ MP3 Player
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-_0060_0060MP3-Player_002c_0027_0027-problematic-use-of-term">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-MP3-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Ogg-Vorbis">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-FLAC">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ In the late 1990s it became feasible to make portable, solid-state
digital audio players. Most support the patented MP3 codec, but not
all. Some support the patent-free audio codecs Ogg Vorbis and FLAC,
and may not even support MP3-encoded files at all, precisely to avoid
@@ -445,250 +588,377 @@ confusing, it also puts MP3 in an undeserved position
of privilege
which encourages people to continue using that vulnerable format. We
suggest the terms “digital audio player,” or simply “audio player”
if context permits.
-</p>
-<a name="Open"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Open </h3>
-
-<a name="index-_0060_0060open_002c_0027_0027-misleading-use-of-term-1"></a>
-<p>Please avoid using the term “open” or “open source” as a
+ </p>
+ <a name="Open">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Open
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-_0060_0060open_002c_0027_0027-misleading-use-of-term-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Please avoid using the term “open” or “open source” as a
substitute for “free software.” Those terms refer to a different
position based on different values. Free software is a political
movement; open source is a development model.
-</p>
-<p>When referring to the open source position, using its name is
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ When referring to the open source position, using its name is
appropriate; but please do not use it to label us or our work—that
leads people to think we share those views.
-</p>
-<a name="PC"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> PC </h3>
-
-<a name="index-_0060_0060PC_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term"></a>
-<p>It’s OK to use the abbreviation “PC” to refer to a certain kind of
+ </p>
+ <a name="PC">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ PC
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-_0060_0060PC_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ It’s OK to use the abbreviation “PC” to refer to a certain kind of
computer hardware, but please don’t use it with the implication that
the computer is running Microsoft
-<a name="index-Windows-1"></a>
-Windows. If you install GNU/Linux on the same computer, it is still a
+ <a name="index-Windows-1">
+ </a>
+ Windows. If you install GNU/Linux on the same computer, it is still a
PC.
-</p>
-<p>The term “WC” has been suggested for a computer running Windows.
-</p>
-<a name="Photoshop"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Photoshop </h3>
-
-<a name="index-_0060_0060photoshop_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term"></a>
-<p>Please avoid using the term “photoshop” as a verb, meaning any kind
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The term “WC” has been suggested for a computer running Windows.
+ </p>
+ <a name="Photoshop">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Photoshop
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-_0060_0060photoshop_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Please avoid using the term “photoshop” as a verb, meaning any kind
of photo manipulation or image editing in general. Photoshop is just
the name of one particular image editing program, which should be
avoided since it is proprietary. There are plenty of free
alternatives, such as
-<a name="index-GIMP"></a>
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GIMP"></a>
-GIMP.
-</p>
-<a name="Piracy"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Piracy </h3>
-
-<a name="index-_0060_0060piracy_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term-4"></a>
-<p>Publishers often refer to copying they don’t approve of as “piracy.”
+ <a name="index-GIMP">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GIMP">
+ </a>
+ GIMP.
+ </p>
+ <a name="Piracy">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Piracy
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-_0060_0060piracy_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term-4">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Publishers often refer to copying they don’t approve of as “piracy.”
In this way, they imply that it is ethically equivalent to attacking
ships on the high seas, kidnapping and murdering the people on
them. Based on such propaganda, they have procured laws in most of the
world to forbid copying in most (or sometimes all)
circumstances. (They are still pressuring to make these prohibitions
more complete.)
-</p>
-<p>If you don’t believe that copying not approved by the publisher is
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ If you don’t believe that copying not approved by the publisher is
just like kidnapping and murder, you might prefer not to use the word
“piracy” to describe it. Neutral terms such as “unauthorized
copying” (or “prohibited copying” for the situation where it is
illegal) are available for use instead. Some of us might even prefer
to use a positive term such as “sharing information with your
neighbor.”
-</p>
-<a name="PowerPoint"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> PowerPoint </h3>
-
-<a name="index-_0060_0060PowerPoint_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term"></a>
-<p>Please avoid using the term “PowerPoint” to mean any kind of slide
+ </p>
+ <a name="PowerPoint">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ PowerPoint
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-_0060_0060PowerPoint_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Please avoid using the term “PowerPoint” to mean any kind of slide
presentation. “PowerPoint” is just the name of one particular
proprietary program to make presentations, and there are plenty of
free alternatives, such as
-<a name="index-TeX-3"></a>
-TeX’s
-<a name="index-beamer-class_002c-TeX"></a>
-<tt>beamer</tt> class
-and
-<a name="index-OpenOffice_002eorg"></a>
-OpenOffice.org’s
-<a name="index-Impress_002c-OpenOffice_002eorg"></a>
-Impress.
-</p>
-<a name="Protection"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Protection </h3>
-
-<a name="index-copyright_002c-_0060_0060protection_0027_0027"></a>
-<a name="index-_0060_0060protection_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term"></a>
-<p>Publishers’ lawyers love to use the term “protection” to describe
+ <a name="index-TeX-3">
+ </a>
+ TeX’s
+ <a name="index-beamer-class_002c-TeX">
+ </a>
+ <tt>
+ beamer
+ </tt>
+ class
+and
+ <a name="index-OpenOffice_002eorg">
+ </a>
+ OpenOffice.org’s
+ <a name="index-Impress_002c-OpenOffice_002eorg">
+ </a>
+ Impress.
+ </p>
+ <a name="Protection">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Protection
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-copyright_002c-_0060_0060protection_0027_0027">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-_0060_0060protection_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Publishers’ lawyers love to use the term “protection” to describe
copyright. This word carries the implication of preventing destruction
or suffering; therefore, it encourages people to identify with the
owner and publisher who benefit from copyright, rather than with the
users who are restricted by it.
-</p>
-<p>It is easy to avoid “protection” and use neutral terms instead. For
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ It is easy to avoid “protection” and use neutral terms instead. For
example, instead of saying, “Copyright protection lasts a very long
time,” you can say, “Copyright lasts a very long time.”
-</p>
-<p>If you want to criticize copyright instead of supporting it, you can
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ If you want to criticize copyright instead of supporting it, you can
use the term “copyright restrictions.” Thus, you can say,
“Copyright restrictions last a very long time.”
-</p>
-<p>The term “protection” is also used to describe malicious features.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The term “protection” is also used to describe malicious features.
For instance, “copy protection” is a feature that interferes with
copying. From the user’s point of view, this is obstruction. So we
could call that malicious feature “copy obstruction.” More often it
is called Digital Restrictions Management (DRM)—see the Defective by
-Design campaign, at <a
href="http://www.defectivebydesign.org";>http://www.defectivebydesign.org</a>.
-</p>
-<a name="RAND-_0028Reasonable-and-Non_002dDiscriminatory_0029"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> RAND (Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory) </h3>
-
-<a
name="index-_0060_0060RAND-_0028Reasonable-and-Non_002dDiscriminatory_0029_002c_0027_0027-avoid-use-of-term-_0028see-also-patents_0029"></a>
-<p>Standards bodies that promulgate patent-restricted standards that
+Design campaign, at
+ <a href="http://www.defectivebydesign.org";>
+ http://www.defectivebydesign.org
+ </a>
+ .
+ </p>
+ <a name="RAND-_0028Reasonable-and-Non_002dDiscriminatory_0029">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ RAND (Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory)
+ </h3>
+ <a
name="index-_0060_0060RAND-_0028Reasonable-and-Non_002dDiscriminatory_0029_002c_0027_0027-avoid-use-of-term-_0028see-also-patents_0029">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Standards bodies that promulgate patent-restricted standards that
prohibit free software typically have a policy of obtaining patent
licenses that require a fixed fee per copy of a conforming program.
They often refer to such licenses by the term “RAND,” which stands
for “reasonable and non-discriminatory.”
-</p>
-<p>That term whitewashes a class of patent licenses that are normally
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ That term whitewashes a class of patent licenses that are normally
neither reasonable nor nondiscriminatory. It is true that these
licenses do not discriminate against any specific person, but they do
discriminate against the free software community, and that makes them
unreasonable. Thus, half of the term “RAND” is deceptive and the
other half is prejudiced.
-</p>
-<p>Standards bodies should recognize that these licenses are
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Standards bodies should recognize that these licenses are
discriminatory, and drop the use of the term “reasonable and
non-discriminatory” or “RAND” to describe them. Until they do so,
writers who do not wish to join in the whitewashing would do well to
reject that term. To accept and use it merely because patent-wielding
companies have made it widespread is to let those companies dictate
the views you express.
-</p>
-<a name="index-patents_002c-_0060_0060uniform-fee-only_0027_0027"></a>
-<p>We suggest the term “uniform fee only,” or “UFO” for short, as a
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-patents_002c-_0060_0060uniform-fee-only_0027_0027">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ We suggest the term “uniform fee only,” or “UFO” for short, as a
replacement. It is accurate because the only condition in these
licenses is a uniform royalty fee.
-</p>
-<a name="Sell-Software"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Sell Software </h3>
-
-<a
name="index-selling_002c-_0060_0060sell-software_002c_0027_0027-ambiguous-term"></a>
-<p>The term “sell software” is ambiguous. Strictly speaking, exchanging
+ </p>
+ <a name="Sell-Software">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Sell Software
+ </h3>
+ <a
name="index-selling_002c-_0060_0060sell-software_002c_0027_0027-ambiguous-term">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The term “sell software” is ambiguous. Strictly speaking, exchanging
a copy of a free program for a sum of money is selling; but people
usually associate the term “sell” with proprietary restrictions on
the subsequent use of the software. You can be more precise, and
prevent confusion, by saying either “distributing copies of a program
for a fee” or “imposing proprietary restrictions on the use of a
program,” depending on what you mean.
-</p>
-<p>See “Selling Free Software” (address@hidden) for further
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ See “Selling Free Software” (address@hidden) for further
discussion of this issue.
-</p>
-<a name="Software-Industry"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Software Industry </h3>
-
-<a
name="index-_0060_0060software-industry_002c_0027_0027-problematic-term"></a>
-<p>The term “software industry” encourages people to imagine that
+ </p>
+ <a name="Software-Industry">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Software Industry
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-_0060_0060software-industry_002c_0027_0027-problematic-term">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The term “software industry” encourages people to imagine that
software is always developed by a sort of factory and then delivered
to “consumers.” The free software community shows this is not the
case. Software businesses exist, and various businesses develop free
and/or nonfree software, but those that develop free software are not
run like factories.
-</p>
-<p>The term “industry” is being used as propaganda by advocates of
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The term “industry” is being used as propaganda by advocates of
software patents. They call software development “industry” and then
try to argue that this means it should be subject to patent
monopolies. The
-<a name="index-European-Parliament"></a>
-<a
name="index-European-Union_002c-proposed-European-Union-software-patents-directive"></a>
-<a
name="index-patents_002c-proposed-European-Union-software-patents-directive"></a>
-European Parliament, rejecting software patents in
-2003,<a name="DOCF35" href="#FOOT35">(35)</a> voted to define “industry” as
“automated
+ <a name="index-European-Parliament">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-European-Union_002c-proposed-European-Union-software-patents-directive">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-patents_002c-proposed-European-Union-software-patents-directive">
+ </a>
+ European Parliament, rejecting software patents in
+2003,
+ <a href="#FOOT35" name="DOCF35">
+ (35)
+ </a>
+ voted to define “industry” as “automated
production of material goods.”
-</p>
-<a name="Theft"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Theft </h3>
-
-<a name="index-_0060_0060theft_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term-1"></a>
-<p>Copyright apologists often use words like “stolen” and “theft” to
+ </p>
+ <a name="Theft">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Theft
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-_0060_0060theft_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Copyright apologists often use words like “stolen” and “theft” to
describe copyright infringement. At the same time, they ask us to
treat the legal system as an authority on ethics: if copying is
forbidden, it must be wrong.
-</p>
-<p>So it is pertinent to mention that the legal system—at least in the
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ So it is pertinent to mention that the legal system—at least in the
US—rejects the idea that copyright infringement is “theft.”
Copyright apologists are making an appeal to authority…and
misrepresenting what authority says.
-</p>
-<p>The idea that laws decide what is right or wrong is mistaken in
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The idea that laws decide what is right or wrong is mistaken in
general. Laws are, at their best, an attempt to achieve justice; to
say that laws define justice or ethical conduct is turning things
upside down.
-</p>
-<a name="Trusted-Computing"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Trusted Computing </h3>
-
-<a
name="index-_0060_0060trusted-computing_002c_0027_0027-avoid-use-of-term-_0028see-also-treacherous-computing_0029"></a>
-<p>“Trusted computing” is the proponents’ name for a scheme to redesign
-computers so that application
-<a name="index-developers_002c-proprietary-software-3"></a>
-developers can trust your computer to obey them instead of you. From
+ </p>
+ <a name="Trusted-Computing">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Trusted Computing
+ </h3>
+ <a
name="index-_0060_0060trusted-computing_002c_0027_0027-avoid-use-of-term-_0028see-also-treacherous-computing_0029">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ “Trusted computing” is the proponents’ name for a scheme to redesign
+computers so that application
+ <a name="index-developers_002c-proprietary-software-3">
+ </a>
+ developers can trust your computer to obey them instead of you. From
their point of view, it is “trusted”; from your point of view, it is
-<a name="index-treacherous-computing"></a>
-“treacherous.”
-</p>
-<a name="Vendor"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Vendor </h3>
-
-<a name="index-_0060_0060vendor_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term"></a>
-<p>Please don’t use the term “vendor” to refer generally to anyone that
+ <a name="index-treacherous-computing">
+ </a>
+ “treacherous.”
+ </p>
+ <a name="Vendor">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Vendor
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-_0060_0060vendor_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Please don’t use the term “vendor” to refer generally to anyone that
develops or packages software. Many programs are developed in order to
sell copies, and their
-<a name="index-developers_002c-term-_0060_0060vendor_0027_0027-and"></a>
-developers are therefore their vendors; this even includes some free
+ <a name="index-developers_002c-term-_0060_0060vendor_0027_0027-and">
+ </a>
+ developers are therefore their vendors; this even includes some free
software packages. However, many programs are developed by volunteers
or organizations which do not intend to sell copies. These developers
are not vendors. Likewise, only some of the packagers of GNU/Linux
distributions are vendors. We recommend the general term “supplier”
instead.
-</p>
-<a name="index-terminology_002c-importance-of-using-correct-8"></a>
-<a
name="index-call-to-action_002c-use-correct-terminology-_0028see-also-terminology_0029-8"></a>
-
-
-
-<div class="footnote">
-<hr><h3>Footnotes</h3>
-<h3><a name="FOOT32" href="#DOCF32">(32)</a></h3>
-<p>Dan Farber, “Oracle’s Ellison Nails Cloud
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-terminology_002c-importance-of-using-correct-8">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-call-to-action_002c-use-correct-terminology-_0028see-also-terminology_0029-8">
+ </a>
+ <div class="footnote">
+ <hr>
+ <h3>
+ Footnotes
+ </h3>
+ <h3>
+ <a href="#DOCF32" name="FOOT32">
+ (32)
+ </a>
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ Dan Farber, “Oracle’s Ellison Nails Cloud
Computing,” 26 September 2008,
-<a
href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-13953_3-10052188-80.html";>http://news.cnet.com/8301-13953_3-10052188-80.html</a>.
+ <a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-13953_3-10052188-80.html";>
+ http://news.cnet.com/8301-13953_3-10052188-80.html
+ </a>
+ .
@vglue -1pc
-</p><h3><a name="FOOT33" href="#DOCF33">(33)</a></h3>
-<p>An unedited transcript of American rock musician
+ </p>
+ <h3>
+ <a href="#DOCF33" name="FOOT33">
+ (33)
+ </a>
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ An unedited transcript of American rock musician
Courtney Love’s 16 May 2000 speech to the Digital Hollywood
online-entertainment conference, in New York, is available at
-<a
href="http://salon.com/technology/feature/2000/06/14/love/print.html";>http://salon.com/technology/feature/2000/06/14/love/print.html</a>.
+ <a href="http://salon.com/technology/feature/2000/06/14/love/print.html";>
+ http://salon.com/technology/feature/2000/06/14/love/print.html
+ </a>
+ .
@vglue -1pc
-</p><h3><a name="FOOT34" href="#DOCF34">(34)</a></h3>
-<p>See my
+ </p>
+ <h3>
+ <a href="#DOCF34" name="FOOT34">
+ (34)
+ </a>
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ See my
article, “On Hacking,” at
-<a
href="http://stallman.org/articles/on-hacking.html";>http://stallman.org/articles/on-hacking.html</a>.
+ <a href="http://stallman.org/articles/on-hacking.html";>
+ http://stallman.org/articles/on-hacking.html
+ </a>
+ .
@vglue -1pc
-</p><h3><a name="FOOT35" href="#DOCF35">(35)</a></h3>
-<p>“Directive on the patentability of
+ </p>
+ <h3>
+ <a href="#DOCF35" name="FOOT35">
+ (35)
+ </a>
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ “Directive on the patentability of
computer-implemented inventions,” 24 September 2003,
-<a
href="http://eupat.ffii.org/papers/europarl0309";>http://eupat.ffii.org/papers/europarl0309</a>.
+ <a href="http://eupat.ffii.org/papers/europarl0309";>
+ http://eupat.ffii.org/papers/europarl0309
+ </a>
+ .
@vglue -1pc
-</p></div>
-<hr size="2"></section></body></html>
+ </p>
+ </hr>
+ </div>
+ <hr size="2"/>
+</section>
diff --git a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_17.html
b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_17.html
index 1173d2b..2358b4d 100644
--- a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_17.html
+++ b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_17.html
@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
-<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/loose.dtd";>
-<html><!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
+<!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
Free Software Foundation
@@ -19,52 +18,43 @@ ISBN 978-0-9831592-0-9
Cover design by Rob Myers.
Cover photograph by Peter Hinely.
- --><!-- Created on February 18, 2016 by texi2html 1.82
-texi2html was written by:
- Lionel Cons <address@hidden> (original author)
- Karl Berry <address@hidden>
- Olaf Bachmann <address@hidden>
- and many others.
-Maintained by: Many creative people.
-Send bugs and suggestions to <address@hidden>
---><head><title>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 17. The Right to Read: A
Dystopian Short Story</title><meta name="description" content="This is the
second edition of Richard Stallman's collection of essays."><meta
name="keywords" content="Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 17. The Right to
Read: A Dystopian Short Story"><meta name="resource-type"
content="document"><meta name="distribution" content="global"><meta
name="Generator" content="texi2html 1.82"><meta http-equiv="Conten [...]
-<!--
-a.summary-letter {text-decoration: none}
-blockquote.smallquotation {font-size: smaller}
-pre.display {font-family: serif}
-pre.format {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-comment {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-preformatted {font-family: serif}
-pre.smalldisplay {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallexample {font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallformat {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smalllisp {font-size: smaller}
-span.roman {font-family:serif; font-weight:normal;}
-span.sansserif {font-family:sans-serif; font-weight:normal;}
-ul.toc {list-style: none}
--->
-</style><link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
href="../static/web-common/style.css"></head><body lang="en" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
text="#000000" link="#0000FF" vlink="#800080" alink="#FF0000" class="article">
+ -->
-<a name="Right-to-Read"></a>
-<header><div id="logo"><a href="/"><img src="../static/gnu.svg" height="100"
width="100"></a></div><h1 class="book-title">Free Software, Free Society, 2nd
ed.</h1></header><section id="main"><a
name="The-Right-to-Read_003a-A-Dystopian-Short-Story"></a>
-<h1 class="chapter"> 17. The Right to Read: A Dystopian Short Story </h1>
-
-<a
name="index-_0060_0060Right-to-Read_003a-A-Dystopian-Short-Story_0027_0027-_0028see-also-DMCA_002c-DRM_002c-fair-use_002c-and-libraries_0029"></a>
-<p><em>From <cite><span class="roman">The Road to Tycho,</span></cite> a
collection of articles about the antecedents of the Lunarian Revolution,
published in Luna City in 2096.</em>
-<br>
-For Dan Halbert, the road to Tycho began in college—when Lissa
+<section id="main">
+ <a name="The-Right-to-Read_003a-A-Dystopian-Short-Story">
+ </a>
+ <h1 class="chapter">
+ 17. The Right to Read: A Dystopian Short Story
+ </h1>
+ <a
name="index-_0060_0060Right-to-Read_003a-A-Dystopian-Short-Story_0027_0027-_0028see-also-DMCA_002c-DRM_002c-fair-use_002c-and-libraries_0029">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ <em>
+ From
+ <cite>
+ <span class="roman">
+ The Road to Tycho,
+ </span>
+ </cite>
+ a collection of articles about the antecedents of the Lunarian Revolution,
published in Luna City in 2096.
+ </em>
+ <br>
+ For Dan Halbert, the road to Tycho began in college—when Lissa
Lenz asked to borrow his computer. Hers had broken down, and unless
she could borrow another, she would fail her midterm project. There
was no one she dared ask, except Dan.
-</p>
-<p>This put Dan in a dilemma. He had to help her—but if he lent
+ </br>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ This put Dan in a dilemma. He had to help her—but if he lent
her his computer, she might read his books. Aside from the fact that
you could go to prison for many years for letting someone else read
your books, the very idea shocked him at first. Like everyone, he had
been taught since elementary school that sharing books was nasty and
wrong—something that only pirates would do.
-</p>
-<p>And there wasn’t much chance that the SPA—the Software
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And there wasn’t much chance that the SPA—the Software
Protection Authority—would fail to catch him. In his software
class, Dan had learned that each book had a copyright monitor that
reported when and where it was read, and by whom, to Central
@@ -73,9 +63,9 @@ also to sell personal interest profiles to retailers.) The
next time
his computer was networked, Central Licensing would find out. He, as
computer owner, would receive the harshest punishment—for not
taking pains to prevent the crime.
-</p>
-
-<p>Of course, Lissa did not necessarily intend to read his books. She
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Of course, Lissa did not necessarily intend to read his books. She
might want the computer only to write her midterm. But Dan knew she
came from a middle-class family and could hardly afford the tuition,
let alone her reading fees. Reading his books might be the only way
@@ -84,16 +74,18 @@ to borrow to pay for all the research papers he read. (Ten
percent of those
fees went to the researchers who wrote the papers; since Dan aimed for
an academic career, he could hope that his own research papers, if
frequently referenced, would bring in enough to repay this loan.)
-</p>
-<p>Later on, Dan would learn there was a time when anyone could go to the
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Later on, Dan would learn there was a time when anyone could go to the
library and read journal articles, and even books, without having to
pay. There were independent scholars who read thousands of pages
without government library grants. But in the 1990s, both commercial
and nonprofit journal publishers had begun charging fees for access.
By 2047, libraries offering free public access to scholarly literature
were a dim memory.
-</p>
-<p>There were ways, of course, to get around the SPA and Central
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ There were ways, of course, to get around the SPA and Central
Licensing. They were themselves illegal. Dan had had a classmate in
software, Frank Martucci, who had obtained an illicit debugging tool,
and used it to skip over the copyright monitor code when reading
@@ -101,46 +93,47 @@ books. But he had told too many friends about it, and one
of them
turned him in to the SPA for a reward (students deep in debt were
easily tempted into betrayal). In 2047, Frank was in prison, not for
pirate reading, but for possessing a debugger.
-</p>
-<p>Dan would later learn that there was a time when anyone could have
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Dan would later learn that there was a time when anyone could have
debugging tools. There were even free debugging tools available on CD
or downloadable over the net. But ordinary users started using them
to bypass copyright monitors, and eventually a judge ruled that this
had become their principal use in actual practice. This meant they
were illegal; the debuggers’ developers were sent to prison.
-</p>
-
-<p>Programmers still needed debugging tools, of course, but debugger
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Programmers still needed debugging tools, of course, but debugger
vendors in 2047 distributed numbered copies only, and only to
officially licensed and bonded programmers. The debugger Dan used in
software class was kept behind a special firewall so that it could be
used only for class exercises.
-</p>
-
-<p>It was also possible to bypass the copyright monitors by installing a
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ It was also possible to bypass the copyright monitors by installing a
modified system kernel. Dan would eventually find out about the free
kernels, even entire free operating systems, that had existed around
the turn of the century. But not only were they illegal, like
debuggers—you could not install one if you had one, without
knowing your computer’s root password. And neither
the FBI nor Microsoft Support would tell you that.
-</p>
-
-<p>Dan concluded that he couldn’t simply lend Lissa his computer. But he
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Dan concluded that he couldn’t simply lend Lissa his computer. But he
couldn’t refuse to help her, because he loved her. Every chance to
speak with her filled him with delight. And that she chose him to ask
for help, that could mean she loved him too.
-</p>
-
-<p>Dan resolved the dilemma by doing something even more
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Dan resolved the dilemma by doing something even more
unthinkable—he lent her the computer, and told her his password.
This way, if Lissa read his books, Central Licensing would think he
was reading them. It was still a crime, but the SPA would not
automatically find out about it. They would only find out if Lissa
reported him.
-</p>
-
-<p>Of course, if the school ever found out that he had given Lissa his
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Of course, if the school ever found out that he had given Lissa his
own password, it would be curtains for both of them as students,
regardless of what she had used it for. School policy was that any
interference with their means of monitoring students’ computer use was
@@ -149,21 +142,21 @@ anything harmful—the offense was making it hard for the
administrators to check on you. They assumed this meant you were
doing something else forbidden, and they did not need to know what it
was.
-</p>
-
-<p>Students were not usually expelled for this—not directly.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Students were not usually expelled for this—not directly.
Instead they were banned from the school computer systems, and would
inevitably fail all their classes.
-</p>
-
-<p>Later, Dan would learn that this kind of university policy started
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Later, Dan would learn that this kind of university policy started
only in the 1980s, when university students in large numbers began
using computers. Previously, universities maintained a different
approach to student discipline; they punished activities that were
harmful, not those that merely raised suspicion.
-</p>
-
-<p>Lissa did not report Dan to the SPA. His decision to help her led to
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Lissa did not report Dan to the SPA. His decision to help her led to
their marriage, and also led them to question what they had been
taught about piracy as children. The couple began reading about the
history of copyright, about the Soviet Union and its restrictions on
@@ -171,173 +164,230 @@ copying, and even the original United States
Constitution. They moved
to Luna, where they found others who had likewise gravitated away from
the long arm of the SPA. When the Tycho Uprising began in 2062, the
universal right to read soon became one of its central aims.
-<a
name="index-_0060_0060Right-to-Read_003a-A-Dystopian-Short-Story_0027_0027-_0028see-also-DMCA_002c-DRM_002c-fair-use_002c-and-libraries_0029-1"></a>
-</p>
-
-<a
name="index-DMCA-_0028see-also-_0060_0060Right-to-Read_002c_0027_0027-fair-use_002c-DRM_002c-and-libraries_0029-1"></a>
-<a
name="index-Digital-Millennium-Copyright-Act-_0028DMCA_0029-_0028see-also-DMCA_002c-_0060_0060Right-to-Read_002c_0027_0027-fair-use_002c-DRM_002c-and-libraries_0029"></a>
-<p>The right to read is a battle being fought today. Although it may
+ <a
name="index-_0060_0060Right-to-Read_003a-A-Dystopian-Short-Story_0027_0027-_0028see-also-DMCA_002c-DRM_002c-fair-use_002c-and-libraries_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <a
name="index-DMCA-_0028see-also-_0060_0060Right-to-Read_002c_0027_0027-fair-use_002c-DRM_002c-and-libraries_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-Digital-Millennium-Copyright-Act-_0028DMCA_0029-_0028see-also-DMCA_002c-_0060_0060Right-to-Read_002c_0027_0027-fair-use_002c-DRM_002c-and-libraries_0029">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The right to read is a battle being fought today. Although it may
take 50 years for our present way of life to fade into obscurity, most
of the specific laws and practices described above have already been
proposed; many have been enacted into law in the US and elsewhere. In
the US, the 1998 Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) established the legal
basis to restrict the reading and lending of computerized books (and
-other works as well). The
-<a name="index-European-Union"></a>
-European Union imposed similar restrictions
-in a 2001 copyright directive. In
-<a name="index-France"></a>
-France, under the
-<a name="index-DADVSI-_0028see-also-both-DMCA-and-DRM_0029"></a>
-DADVSI law adopted in 2006, mere possession of a copy of
-<a name="index-DeCSS-_0028see-also-both-DMCA-and-DRM_0029"></a>
-DeCSS, the free program
+other works as well). The
+ <a name="index-European-Union">
+ </a>
+ European Union imposed similar restrictions
+in a 2001 copyright directive. In
+ <a name="index-France">
+ </a>
+ France, under the
+ <a name="index-DADVSI-_0028see-also-both-DMCA-and-DRM_0029">
+ </a>
+ DADVSI law adopted in 2006, mere possession of a copy of
+ <a name="index-DeCSS-_0028see-also-both-DMCA-and-DRM_0029">
+ </a>
+ DeCSS, the free program
to decrypt video on a DVD, is a crime.
-</p>
-<p>In 2001,
-<a name="index-Disney"></a>
-Disney-funded Senator
-<a name="index-Hollings_002c-Senator-Ernest"></a>
-Hollings proposed a bill called the
-<a
name="index-Security-Systems-Standards-and-Certification-Act-_0028SSSCA_0029-_0028see-also-Consumer-Broadband-and-Digital-Television-Promotion-Act-_0028CBDTPA_0029_0029"></a>
-SSSCA that would require every new computer to have mandatory
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ In 2001,
+ <a name="index-Disney">
+ </a>
+ Disney-funded Senator
+ <a name="index-Hollings_002c-Senator-Ernest">
+ </a>
+ Hollings proposed a bill called the
+ <a
name="index-Security-Systems-Standards-and-Certification-Act-_0028SSSCA_0029-_0028see-also-Consumer-Broadband-and-Digital-Television-Promotion-Act-_0028CBDTPA_0029_0029">
+ </a>
+ SSSCA that would require every new computer to have mandatory
copy-restriction facilities that the user cannot bypass. Following
-the
-<a name="index-Clipper-chip"></a>
-Clipper chip and similar US government key-escrow proposals, this
+the
+ <a name="index-Clipper-chip">
+ </a>
+ Clipper chip and similar US government key-escrow proposals, this
shows a long-term trend: computer systems are increasingly set up to
give absentees with clout control over the people actually using the
computer system. The SSSCA was later renamed to the unpronounceable
-<a
name="index-Consumer-Broadband-and-Digital-Television-Promotion-Act-_0028CBDTPA_0029-1"></a>
-CBDTPA, which was glossed as the “Consume But Don’t Try
+ <a
name="index-Consumer-Broadband-and-Digital-Television-Promotion-Act-_0028CBDTPA_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ CBDTPA, which was glossed as the “Consume But Don’t Try
Programming Act.”
-</p>
-<p>The Republicans took control of the US senate shortly thereafter.
-They are less tied to
-<a name="index-Hollywood"></a>
-Hollywood than the Democrats, so they did not
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The Republicans took control of the US senate shortly thereafter.
+They are less tied to
+ <a name="index-Hollywood">
+ </a>
+ Hollywood than the Democrats, so they did not
press these proposals. Now that the Democrats are back in control,
the danger is once again higher.
-</p>
-<p>In 2001 the US began attempting to use the proposed
-<a name="index-Free-Trade-Area-of-the-Americas-_0028FTAA_0029"></a>
-Free Trade Area of
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ In 2001 the US began attempting to use the proposed
+ <a name="index-Free-Trade-Area-of-the-Americas-_0028FTAA_0029">
+ </a>
+ Free Trade Area of
the Americas (FTAA) treaty to impose the same rules on all the countries in
the Western Hemisphere. The FTAA is one of the so-called free
trade treaties, which are actually designed to give business
increased power over democratic governments; imposing laws like the
DMCA is typical of this spirit. The FTAA was effectively killed by
-<a name="index-Lula-da-Silva_002c-President"></a>
-<a name="index-da-Silva_002c-President-Luis-Inacio-Lula"></a>
-Lula, President of
-<a name="index-Brazil-1"></a>
-Brazil, who rejected the DMCA requirement and
+ <a name="index-Lula-da-Silva_002c-President">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-da-Silva_002c-President-Luis-Inacio-Lula">
+ </a>
+ Lula, President of
+ <a name="index-Brazil-1">
+ </a>
+ Brazil, who rejected the DMCA requirement and
others.
@address@hidden@gobble
@address@hidden@address@hidden@address@hidden
@address@hidden
@dofootnote{
-<em>^1</em>This note has been updated several times since the first
publication of the story.}
-</p>
-<p>Since then, the US has imposed similar requirements on countries such
-as
-<a name="index-Australia"></a>
-Australia and
-<a name="index-Mexico"></a>
-Mexico through bilateral “free trade”
-agreements, and on countries such as
-<a name="index-Costa-Rica"></a>
-Costa Rica through another
-treaty,
-<a name="index-CAFTA"></a>
-CAFTA.
-<a name="index-Ecuador"></a>
-Ecuador’s President
-<a name="index-Correa_002c-President-Rafael"></a>
-Correa refused to sign a
+ <em>
+ ^1
+ </em>
+ This note has been updated several times since the first publication of the
story.}
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Since then, the US has imposed similar requirements on countries such
+as
+ <a name="index-Australia">
+ </a>
+ Australia and
+ <a name="index-Mexico">
+ </a>
+ Mexico through bilateral “free trade”
+agreements, and on countries such as
+ <a name="index-Costa-Rica">
+ </a>
+ Costa Rica through another
+treaty,
+ <a name="index-CAFTA">
+ </a>
+ CAFTA.
+ <a name="index-Ecuador">
+ </a>
+ Ecuador’s President
+ <a name="index-Correa_002c-President-Rafael">
+ </a>
+ Correa refused to sign a
“free trade” agreement with the US, but I’ve heard Ecuador
had adopted something like the DMCA in 2003.
-</p>
-<a name="index-Microsoft_002c-control-over-users"></a>
-<p>One of the ideas in the story was not proposed in reality until 2002.
-This is the idea that the
-<a name="index-FBI"></a>
-FBI and Microsoft will keep the
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-Microsoft_002c-control-over-users">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ One of the ideas in the story was not proposed in reality until 2002.
+This is the idea that the
+ <a name="index-FBI">
+ </a>
+ FBI and Microsoft will keep the
root passwords for your personal computers, and not let you have
them.
-</p>
-<p>The proponents of this scheme have given it names such as
-<a
name="index-_0060_0060trusted-computing_002c_0027_0027-avoid-use-of-term-_0028see-also-treacherous-computing_0029-1"></a>
-“trusted computing” and
-<a name="index-Palladium"></a>
-“Palladium.” We call
-it
-<a name="index-treacherous-computing-1"></a>
-“treacherous
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The proponents of this scheme have given it names such as
+ <a
name="index-_0060_0060trusted-computing_002c_0027_0027-avoid-use-of-term-_0028see-also-treacherous-computing_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ “trusted computing” and
+ <a name="index-Palladium">
+ </a>
+ “Palladium.” We call
+it
+ <a name="index-treacherous-computing-1">
+ </a>
+ “treacherous
computing” because the effect is to make your computer obey
companies even to the extent of disobeying and defying you. This was
-implemented in 2007 as part of
-<a name="index-Windows_002c-Vista"></a>
-<a name="index-Vista_002c-Windows-_0028see-also-both-Windows-and-DRM_0029"></a>
-Windows Vista; we expect
-<a name="index-Apple-_0028see-also-DRM_0029"></a>
-Apple to do something similar. In this scheme,
+implemented in 2007 as part of
+ <a name="index-Windows_002c-Vista">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Vista_002c-Windows-_0028see-also-both-Windows-and-DRM_0029">
+ </a>
+ Windows Vista; we expect
+ <a name="index-Apple-_0028see-also-DRM_0029">
+ </a>
+ Apple to do something similar. In this scheme,
it is the manufacturer that keeps the secret code, but
the FBI would have little trouble getting it.
-</p>
-<p>What Microsoft keeps is not exactly a password in the traditional
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ What Microsoft keeps is not exactly a password in the traditional
sense; no person ever types it on a terminal. Rather, it is a
signature and encryption key that corresponds to a second key stored
in your computer. This enables Microsoft, and potentially any web
sites that cooperate with Microsoft, the ultimate control over what
the user can do on his own computer.
-</p>
-<a name="index-DRM_002c-Vista_0027s-main-purpose"></a>
-<p>Vista also gives Microsoft additional powers; for instance, Microsoft
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-DRM_002c-Vista_0027s-main-purpose">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Vista also gives Microsoft additional powers; for instance, Microsoft
can forcibly install upgrades, and it can order all machines running
Vista to refuse to run a certain device driver. The main purpose of
Vista’s many restrictions is to impose DRM (Digital Restrictions
Management) that users can’t overcome. The threat of DRM is why we
-have established the
-<a name="index-Defective-by-Design-_0028see-also-DRM_0029-1"></a>
-Defective by Design campaign.
-</p>
-<a name="index-Software-Publishers-Association-_0028SPA_0029-2"></a>
-<p>When this story was first written, the SPA was threatening small
+have established the
+ <a name="index-Defective-by-Design-_0028see-also-DRM_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ Defective by Design campaign.
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-Software-Publishers-Association-_0028SPA_0029-2">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ When this story was first written, the SPA was threatening small
Internet service providers, demanding they permit the SPA to monitor
-all users. Most
-<a name="index-ISP-_0028Internet-Service-Provider_0029"></a>
-ISPs surrendered when threatened, because they cannot
-afford to fight back in court. One ISP,
-<a name="index-Community-ConneXion"></a>
-Community ConneXion in
+all users. Most
+ <a name="index-ISP-_0028Internet-Service-Provider_0029">
+ </a>
+ ISPs surrendered when threatened, because they cannot
+afford to fight back in court. One ISP,
+ <a name="index-Community-ConneXion">
+ </a>
+ Community ConneXion in
Oakland, California, refused the demand and was actually sued. The
SPA later dropped the suit, but obtained the DMCA, which gave them the
power they sought.
-<a
name="index-DMCA-_0028see-also-_0060_0060Right-to-Read_002c_0027_0027-fair-use_002c-DRM_002c-and-libraries_0029-2"></a>
-<a
name="index-Digital-Millennium-Copyright-Act-_0028DMCA_0029-_0028see-also-DMCA_002c-_0060_0060Right-to-Read_002c_0027_0027-fair-use_002c-DRM_002c-and-libraries_0029-1"></a>
-</p>
-<p>The SPA, which actually stands for Software Publishers Association,
-has been replaced in its police-like role by the
-<a
name="index-Business-Software-Alliance-_0028BSA_0029-_0028see-also-Software-Publishers-Association-_0028SPA_0029_0029"></a>
-Business
+ <a
name="index-DMCA-_0028see-also-_0060_0060Right-to-Read_002c_0027_0027-fair-use_002c-DRM_002c-and-libraries_0029-2">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-Digital-Millennium-Copyright-Act-_0028DMCA_0029-_0028see-also-DMCA_002c-_0060_0060Right-to-Read_002c_0027_0027-fair-use_002c-DRM_002c-and-libraries_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The SPA, which actually stands for Software Publishers Association,
+has been replaced in its police-like role by the
+ <a
name="index-Business-Software-Alliance-_0028BSA_0029-_0028see-also-Software-Publishers-Association-_0028SPA_0029_0029">
+ </a>
+ Business
Software Alliance. The BSA is not, today, an official police force;
unofficially, it acts like one. Using methods reminiscent of the
-erstwhile
-<a name="index-Soviet-Union-2"></a>
-Soviet Union, it invites people to inform on their coworkers
-and friends. A BSA terror campaign in
-<a name="index-Argentina"></a>
-Argentina in 2001 made
+erstwhile
+ <a name="index-Soviet-Union-2">
+ </a>
+ Soviet Union, it invites people to inform on their coworkers
+and friends. A BSA terror campaign in
+ <a name="index-Argentina">
+ </a>
+ Argentina in 2001 made
slightly veiled threats that people sharing software would be raped.
-</p>
-<a name="index-universities-2"></a>
-<p>The university security policies described above are not imaginary.
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-universities-2">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The university security policies described above are not imaginary.
For example, a computer at one Chicago-area university displayed this
message upon login:
-</p>
-<blockquote class="smallquotation">
-<p>This system is for the use of authorized users only. Individuals using
+ </p>
+ <blockquote class="smallquotation">
+ <p>
+ This system is for the use of authorized users only. Individuals using
this computer system without authority or in the excess of their authority
are subject to having all their activities on this system monitored and
recorded by system personnel. In the course of monitoring individuals
@@ -347,29 +397,60 @@ system expressly consents to such monitoring and is
advised that if such
monitoring reveals possible evidence of illegal activity or violation of
University regulations system personnel may provide the evidence of such
monitoring to University authorities and/or law enforcement officials.
-</p>
-</blockquote>
-<p>This is an interesting approach to the
-<a name="index-Fourth-Amendment"></a>
-Fourth Amendment: pressure most
+ </p>
+ </blockquote>
+ <p>
+ This is an interesting approach to the
+ <a name="index-Fourth-Amendment">
+ </a>
+ Fourth Amendment: pressure most
everyone to agree, in advance, to waive their rights under it.
-</p>
-<a name="References"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> References </h3>
-
-<ul><li>
-United States Patent and Trademark Office, <cite>Intellectual Property
[<em>sic</em>] and the National Information Infrastructure: The Report of the
Working Group on Intellectual Property [<em>sic</em>] Rights,</cite>
Washington, DC: GPO, 1995.
-
-</li><li>
-Samuelson, Pamela, “The Copyright Grab,” <em>Wired,</em> January 1996, n. 4.01.
-
-</li><li>
-Boyle, James, “Sold Out,” <em>New York Times,</em> 31 March 1996, sec. 4, p.
15.
-
-</li><li>
-Editorial, <em>Washington Post,</em> “Public Data or Private Data,” 3 November
1996, sec. C, p. 6.
-
-</li><li>
-Union for the Public Domain—an organization that aims to resist and reverse
the overextension of copyright and patent powers.
-
-</li></ul><hr size="2"></section></body></html>
+ </p>
+ <a name="References">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ References
+ </h3>
+ <ul>
+ <li>
+ United States Patent and Trademark Office,
+ <cite>
+ Intellectual Property [
+ <em>
+ sic
+ </em>
+ ] and the National Information Infrastructure: The Report of the Working
Group on Intellectual Property [
+ <em>
+ sic
+ </em>
+ ] Rights,
+ </cite>
+ Washington, DC: GPO, 1995.
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ Samuelson, Pamela, “The Copyright Grab,”
+ <em>
+ Wired,
+ </em>
+ January 1996, n. 4.01.
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ Boyle, James, “Sold Out,”
+ <em>
+ New York Times,
+ </em>
+ 31 March 1996, sec. 4, p. 15.
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ Editorial,
+ <em>
+ Washington Post,
+ </em>
+ “Public Data or Private Data,” 3 November 1996, sec. C, p. 6.
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ Union for the Public Domain—an organization that aims to resist and reverse
the overextension of copyright and patent powers.
+ </li>
+ </ul>
+ <hr size="2"/>
+</section>
diff --git a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_18.html
b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_18.html
index 9fc1c0b..5e9a960 100644
--- a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_18.html
+++ b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_18.html
@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
-<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/loose.dtd";>
-<html><!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
+<!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
Free Software Foundation
@@ -19,39 +18,18 @@ ISBN 978-0-9831592-0-9
Cover design by Rob Myers.
Cover photograph by Peter Hinely.
- --><!-- Created on February 18, 2016 by texi2html 1.82
-texi2html was written by:
- Lionel Cons <address@hidden> (original author)
- Karl Berry <address@hidden>
- Olaf Bachmann <address@hidden>
- and many others.
-Maintained by: Many creative people.
-Send bugs and suggestions to <address@hidden>
---><head><title>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 18. Misinterpreting
Copyright—A Series of Errors</title><meta name="description" content="This is
the second edition of Richard Stallman's collection of essays."><meta
name="keywords" content="Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 18.
Misinterpreting Copyright—A Series of Errors"><meta name="resource-type"
content="document"><meta name="distribution" content="global"><meta
name="Generator" content="texi2html 1.82"><meta http-equiv="Co [...]
-<!--
-a.summary-letter {text-decoration: none}
-blockquote.smallquotation {font-size: smaller}
-pre.display {font-family: serif}
-pre.format {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-comment {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-preformatted {font-family: serif}
-pre.smalldisplay {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallexample {font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallformat {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smalllisp {font-size: smaller}
-span.roman {font-family:serif; font-weight:normal;}
-span.sansserif {font-family:sans-serif; font-weight:normal;}
-ul.toc {list-style: none}
--->
-</style><link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
href="../static/web-common/style.css"></head><body lang="en" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
text="#000000" link="#0000FF" vlink="#800080" alink="#FF0000" class="article">
+ -->
-<a name="Mis-Cop"></a>
-<header><div id="logo"><a href="/"><img src="../static/gnu.svg" height="100"
width="100"></a></div><h1 class="book-title">Free Software, Free Society, 2nd
ed.</h1></header><section id="main"><a
name="Misinterpreting-Copyright_002d_002d_002dA-Series-of-Errors"></a>
-<h1 class="chapter"> 18. Misinterpreting Copyright—A Series of Errors </h1>
-
-<a name="index-Constitution_002c-copyright-and-US"></a>
-<p>
-Something strange and dangerous is happening in copyright law. Under
+<section id="main">
+ <a name="Misinterpreting-Copyright_002d_002d_002dA-Series-of-Errors">
+ </a>
+ <h1 class="chapter">
+ 18. Misinterpreting Copyright—A Series of Errors
+ </h1>
+ <a name="index-Constitution_002c-copyright-and-US">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Something strange and dangerous is happening in copyright law. Under
the US Constitution, copyright exists to benefit users—those
who read books, listen to music, watch movies, or run software—not
for the sake of publishers or authors. Yet even as people tend
@@ -59,57 +37,82 @@ increasingly to reject and disobey the copyright
restrictions imposed
on them “for their own benefit,” the US government is
adding more restrictions, and trying to frighten the public into
obedience with harsh new penalties.
-</p>
-<p>How did copyright policies come to be diametrically opposed to their
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ How did copyright policies come to be diametrically opposed to their
stated purpose? And how can we bring them back into alignment with that
purpose? To understand, we should start by looking at the root of
United States copyright law: the US Constitution.
-</p>
-<a name="Copyright-in-the-US-Constitution"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Copyright in the US Constitution </h3>
-
-<p>When the US Constitution was drafted, the idea that authors were
+ </p>
+ <a name="Copyright-in-the-US-Constitution">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Copyright in the US Constitution
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ When the US Constitution was drafted, the idea that authors were
entitled to a copyright monopoly was proposed—and rejected. The
founders of our country adopted a different premise, that copyright is
not a natural right of authors, but an artificial concession made to
them for the sake of progress. The Constitution gives permission for a
copyright system with this clause (Article I, Section 8,
Clause 8):
-</p>
-<blockquote class="smallquotation">
-<p>[Congress shall have the power] to promote the Progress of Science and
+ </p>
+ <blockquote class="smallquotation">
+ <p>
+ [Congress shall have the power] to promote the Progress of Science and
the useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors
the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.
-</p>
-</blockquote>
-
-<a name="index-Supreme-Court_002c-US-1"></a>
-<p>The Supreme Court has repeatedly affirmed that promoting progress means
-benefit for the users of copyrighted works. For example, in <em>Fox Film
-v. Doyal,</em><a name="DOCF36" href="#FOOT36">(36)</a> the court said,
-</p>
-<blockquote class="smallquotation">
-<p>The sole interest of the United States and the primary object in
+ </p>
+ </blockquote>
+ <a name="index-Supreme-Court_002c-US-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The Supreme Court has repeatedly affirmed that promoting progress means
+benefit for the users of copyrighted works. For example, in
+ <em>
+ Fox Film
+v. Doyal,
+ </em>
+ <a href="#FOOT36" name="DOCF36">
+ (36)
+ </a>
+ the court said,
+ </p>
+ <blockquote class="smallquotation">
+ <p>
+ The sole interest of the United States and the primary object in
conferring the [copyright] monopoly lie in the general benefits
derived by the public from the labors of authors.
-</p>
-</blockquote>
-
-<p>This fundamental decision explains why copyright is
-not <em>required</em> by the Constitution, only <em>permitted</em> as an
+ </p>
+ </blockquote>
+ <p>
+ This fundamental decision explains why copyright is
+not
+ <em>
+ required
+ </em>
+ by the Constitution, only
+ <em>
+ permitted
+ </em>
+ as an
option—and why it is supposed to last for “limited
times.” If copyright were a natural right, something that
authors have because they deserve it, nothing could justify
terminating this right after a certain period of time, any more than
everyone’s house should become public property after a certain lapse
of time from its construction.
-</p>
-
-<a name="The-_0060_0060Copyright-Bargain_0027_0027"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> The “Copyright Bargain” </h3>
-
-<a name="index-copyright_002c-_0060_0060copyright-bargain_0027_0027"></a>
-<p>The copyright system works by providing privileges and thus benefits
+ </p>
+ <a name="The-_0060_0060Copyright-Bargain_0027_0027">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ The “Copyright Bargain”
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-copyright_002c-_0060_0060copyright-bargain_0027_0027">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The copyright system works by providing privileges and thus benefits
to publishers and authors; but it does not do this for their sake.
Rather, it does this to modify their behavior: to provide an incentive
for authors to write more and publish more. In effect, the government
@@ -119,14 +122,16 @@ this concept the “copyright bargain.” It is like a
government purchase of a highway or an airplane using taxpayers’
money, except that the government spends our freedom instead of our
money.
-</p>
-<p>But is the bargain as it exists actually a good deal for the public?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ But is the bargain as it exists actually a good deal for the public?
Many alternative bargains are possible; which one is best? Every
issue of copyright policy is part of this question. If we
misunderstand the nature of the question, we will tend to decide the
issues badly.
-</p>
-<p>The Constitution authorizes granting copyright powers to authors. In
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The Constitution authorizes granting copyright powers to authors. In
practice, authors typically cede them to publishers; it is usually the
publishers, not the authors, who exercise these powers and get most of
the benefits, though authors may get a small portion. Thus it is
@@ -136,37 +141,48 @@ article refers to publishers rather than authors as the
holders of
copyright powers. It also refers to the users of copyrighted works as
“readers,” even though using them does not always mean
reading, because “the users” is remote and abstract.
-</p>
-<a name="The-First-Error_003a-_0060_0060Striking-a-Balance_0027_0027"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> The First Error: “Striking a Balance” </h3>
-
-<a
name="index-copyright_002c-erroneous-concept-of-_0060_0060striking-a-balance_0027_0027"></a>
-<p>The copyright bargain places the public first: benefit for the reading
+ </p>
+ <a name="The-First-Error_003a-_0060_0060Striking-a-Balance_0027_0027">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ The First Error: “Striking a Balance”
+ </h3>
+ <a
name="index-copyright_002c-erroneous-concept-of-_0060_0060striking-a-balance_0027_0027">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The copyright bargain places the public first: benefit for the reading
public is an end in itself; benefits (if any) for publishers are just
a means toward that end. Readers’ interests and publishers’ interests
are thus qualitatively unequal in priority. The first step in
misinterpreting the purpose of copyright is the elevation of the
publishers to the same level of importance as the readers.
-</p>
-<p>It is often said that US copyright law is meant to “strike a
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ It is often said that US copyright law is meant to “strike a
balance” between the interests of publishers and readers. Those
who cite this interpretation present it as a restatement of the basic
position stated in the Constitution; in other words, it is supposed to
be equivalent to the copyright bargain.
-</p>
-<p>But the two interpretations are far from equivalent; they are
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ But the two interpretations are far from equivalent; they are
different conceptually, and different in their implications. The
balance concept assumes that the readers’ and publishers’ interests
-differ in importance only quantitatively, in <em>how much
-weight</em> we should give them, and in what actions they apply to.
+differ in importance only quantitatively, in
+ <em>
+ how much
+weight
+ </em>
+ we should give them, and in what actions they apply to.
The term “stakeholders” is often used to frame the issue
in this way; it assumes that all kinds of interest in a policy
decision are equally important. This view rejects the qualitative
distinction between the readers’ and publishers’ interests which is at
the root of the government’s participation in the copyright
bargain.
-</p>
-<p>The consequences of this alteration are far-reaching, because the
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The consequences of this alteration are far-reaching, because the
great protection for the public in the copyright bargain—the
idea that copyright privileges can be justified only in the name of
the readers, never in the name of the publishers—is discarded
@@ -175,8 +191,9 @@ the publishers is regarded as an end in itself, it can
justify
copyright privileges; in other words, the “balance”
concept says that privileges can be justified in the name of someone
other than the public.
-</p>
-<p>As a practical matter, the consequence of the “balance”
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ As a practical matter, the consequence of the “balance”
concept is to reverse the burden of justification for changes in
copyright law. The copyright bargain places the burden on the
publishers to convince the readers to cede certain freedoms. The
@@ -186,26 +203,33 @@ additional privilege. Unless harm to the readers can be
proved,
sufficient to “outweigh” this benefit, we are led to
conclude that the publishers are entitled to almost any privilege they
request.
-</p>
-<p>Since the idea of “striking a balance” between publishers and
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Since the idea of “striking a balance” between publishers and
readers denies the readers the primacy they are entitled to, we must
reject it.
-<a
name="index-copyright_002c-erroneous-concept-of-_0060_0060striking-a-balance_0027_0027-1"></a>
-</p>
-<a name="Balancing-against-What_003f"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Balancing against What? </h3>
-
-<p>When the government buys something for the public, it acts on behalf
+ <a
name="index-copyright_002c-erroneous-concept-of-_0060_0060striking-a-balance_0027_0027-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <a name="Balancing-against-What_003f">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Balancing against What?
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ When the government buys something for the public, it acts on behalf
of the public; its responsibility is to obtain the best possible
deal—best for the public, not for the other party in the
agreement.
-</p>
-<p>For example, when signing contracts with construction companies to build
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ For example, when signing contracts with construction companies to build
highways, the government aims to spend as little as possible of the
public’s money. Government agencies use competitive bidding to push the
price down.
-</p>
-<p>As a practical matter, the price cannot be zero, because contractors
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ As a practical matter, the price cannot be zero, because contractors
will not bid that low. Although not entitled to special
consideration, they have the usual rights of citizens in a free
society, including the right to refuse disadvantageous contracts; even
@@ -215,56 +239,72 @@ balancing of two interests each with claim to special
consideration.
It is a balance between a public goal and market forces. The
government tries to obtain for the taxpaying motorists the best deal
they can get in the context of a free society and a free market.
-</p>
-<p>In the copyright bargain, the government spends our freedom instead of
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ In the copyright bargain, the government spends our freedom instead of
our money. Freedom is more precious than money, so government’s
responsibility to spend our freedom wisely and frugally is even
greater than its responsibility to spend our money thus. Governments
must never put the publishers’ interests on a par with the public’s
freedom.
-</p>
-<a
name="Not-_0060_0060Balance_0027_0027-but-_0060_0060Trade_002dOff_0027_0027"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Not “Balance” but “Trade-Off” </h3>
-
-<p>The idea of balancing the readers’ interests against the publishers’
+ </p>
+ <a
name="Not-_0060_0060Balance_0027_0027-but-_0060_0060Trade_002dOff_0027_0027">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Not “Balance” but “Trade-Off”
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ The idea of balancing the readers’ interests against the publishers’
is the wrong way to judge copyright policy, but there are indeed two
-interests to be weighed: two interests <em>of the readers.</em> Readers
+interests to be weighed: two interests
+ <em>
+ of the readers.
+ </em>
+ Readers
have an interest in their own freedom in using published works;
depending on circumstances, they may also have an interest in
encouraging publication through some kind of incentive system.
-</p>
-<p>The word “balance,” in discussions of copyright, has come
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The word “balance,” in discussions of copyright, has come
to stand as shorthand for the idea of “striking a balance”
between the readers and the publishers. Therefore, to use the word
“balance” in regard to the readers’ two interests would be
confusing. We need another term.
-</p>
-<p>In general, when one party has two goals that partly conflict, and
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ In general, when one party has two goals that partly conflict, and
cannot completely achieve both of them, we call this a
“trade-off.” Therefore, rather than speaking of
“striking the right balance” between parties, we should
speak of “finding the right trade-off between spending our
freedom and keeping it.”
-</p>
-<a name="The-Second-Error_003a-Maximizing-One-Output"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> The Second Error: Maximizing One Output </h3>
-
-<a name="index-copyright_002c-erroneous-concept-of-maximizing-one-output"></a>
-<p>The second mistake in copyright policy consists of adopting the goal
+ </p>
+ <a name="The-Second-Error_003a-Maximizing-One-Output">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ The Second Error: Maximizing One Output
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-copyright_002c-erroneous-concept-of-maximizing-one-output">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The second mistake in copyright policy consists of adopting the goal
of maximizing—not just increasing—the number of
published works. The erroneous concept of “striking a
balance” elevated the publishers to parity with the readers;
this second error places them far above the readers.
-</p>
-<p>When we purchase something, we do not generally buy the whole quantity
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ When we purchase something, we do not generally buy the whole quantity
in stock or the most expensive model. Instead we conserve funds for
other purchases, by buying only what we need of any particular good, and
choosing a model of sufficient rather than highest quality. The
principle of diminishing returns suggests that spending all our money on
one particular good is likely to be an inefficient allocation of resources;
we generally choose to keep some money for another use.
-</p>
-<p>Diminishing returns applies to copyright just as to any other
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Diminishing returns applies to copyright just as to any other
purchase. The first freedoms we should trade away are those we miss
the least, and whose sacrifice gives the largest encouragement to
publication. As we trade additional freedoms that cut closer to home,
@@ -274,18 +314,24 @@ increment becomes zero, we may well say it is not worth
its
incremental price; we would then settle on a bargain whose overall
result is to increase the amount of publication, but not to the utmost
possible extent.
-</p>
-<p>Accepting the goal of maximizing publication rejects all these wiser,
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Accepting the goal of maximizing publication rejects all these wiser,
more advantageous bargains in advance—it dictates that the
public must cede nearly all of its freedom to use published works, for
just a little more publication.
-<a name="index-copyright_002c-_0060_0060copyright-bargain_0027_0027-1"></a>
-</p>
-<a name="The-Rhetoric-of-Maximization"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> The Rhetoric of Maximization </h3>
-
-<a name="index-_0060_0060piracy_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term-5"></a>
-<p>In practice, the goal of maximizing publication regardless of the cost
+ <a name="index-copyright_002c-_0060_0060copyright-bargain_0027_0027-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <a name="The-Rhetoric-of-Maximization">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ The Rhetoric of Maximization
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-_0060_0060piracy_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term-5">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ In practice, the goal of maximizing publication regardless of the cost
to freedom is supported by widespread rhetoric which asserts that
public copying is illegitimate, unfair, and intrinsically wrong. For
instance, the publishers call people who copy “pirates,” a
@@ -296,8 +342,9 @@ editions; its modern use by the publishers is almost the
reverse.)
This rhetoric directly rejects the constitutional basis for copyright,
but presents itself as representing the unquestioned tradition of the
American legal system.
-</p>
-<p>The “pirate” rhetoric is typically accepted because it
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The “pirate” rhetoric is typically accepted because it
so pervades the media that few people realize how radical it is. It
is effective because if copying by the public is fundamentally
illegitimate, we can never object to the publishers’ demand that we
@@ -305,126 +352,173 @@ surrender our freedom to do so. In other words, when
the public is
challenged to show why publishers should not receive some additional
power, the most important reason of all—“We want to
copy”—is disqualified in advance.
-</p>
-<p>This leaves no way to argue against increasing copyright power except
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ This leaves no way to argue against increasing copyright power except
using side issues. Hence, opposition to stronger copyright powers today
almost exclusively cites side issues, and never dares cite the freedom
to distribute copies as a legitimate public value.
-</p>
-<p>As a practical matter, the goal of maximization enables publishers to
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ As a practical matter, the goal of maximization enables publishers to
argue that “A certain practice is reducing our sales—or
we think it might—so we presume it diminishes publication by
some unknown amount, and therefore it should be prohibited.” We
are led to the outrageous conclusion that the public good is measured
by publishers’ sales: What’s good for General Media is good for the
USA.
-<a name="index-_0060_0060piracy_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term-6"></a>
-</p>
-<a name="The-Third-Error_003a-Maximizing-Publishers_0027-Power"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> The Third Error: Maximizing Publishers’ Power </h3>
-
-<a
name="index-copyright_002c-erroneous-concept-of-maximizing-publishers_0027-power"></a>
-<p>Once the publishers have obtained assent to the policy goal of
+ <a name="index-_0060_0060piracy_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term-6">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <a name="The-Third-Error_003a-Maximizing-Publishers_0027-Power">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ The Third Error: Maximizing Publishers’ Power
+ </h3>
+ <a
name="index-copyright_002c-erroneous-concept-of-maximizing-publishers_0027-power">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Once the publishers have obtained assent to the policy goal of
maximizing publication output at any cost, their next step is to infer
that this requires giving them the maximum possible powers—making
copyright cover every imaginable use of a work, or applying
some other legal tool such as “shrink wrap” licenses to
equivalent effect. This goal, which entails the abolition of
-<a name="index-copyright_002c-fair-use"></a>
-<a name="index-fair-use-_0028see-also-copyright_0029"></a>
-“fair use” and the “right of first sale,” is
+ <a name="index-copyright_002c-fair-use">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-fair-use-_0028see-also-copyright_0029">
+ </a>
+ “fair use” and the “right of first sale,” is
being pressed at every available level of government, from states of
the US to international bodies.
-</p>
-<p>This step is erroneous because strict copyright rules obstruct the
-creation of useful new works. For instance,
-<a name="index-Shakespeare_002c-William"></a>
-Shakespeare borrowed the
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ This step is erroneous because strict copyright rules obstruct the
+creation of useful new works. For instance,
+ <a name="index-Shakespeare_002c-William">
+ </a>
+ Shakespeare borrowed the
plots of some of his plays from works others had published a few decades
before, so if today’s copyright law had been in effect, his plays would
have been illegal.
-</p>
-<p>Even if we wanted the highest possible rate of publication, regardless
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Even if we wanted the highest possible rate of publication, regardless
of cost to the public, maximizing publishers’ power is the wrong way to
get it. As a means of promoting progress, it is self-defeating.
-</p>
-<a name="The-Results-of-the-Three-Errors"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> The Results of the Three Errors </h3>
-
-<a name="index-copyright_002c-duration-of-term-of"></a>
-<p>The current trend in copyright legislation is to hand publishers broader
+ </p>
+ <a name="The-Results-of-the-Three-Errors">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ The Results of the Three Errors
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-copyright_002c-duration-of-term-of">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The current trend in copyright legislation is to hand publishers broader
powers for longer periods of time. The conceptual basis of copyright,
as it emerges distorted from the series of errors, rarely offers a basis
for saying no. Legislators give lip service to the idea that copyright
serves the public, while in fact giving publishers whatever they ask
for.
-</p>
-<p>For example, here is what Senator
-<a name="index-Hatch_002c-Senator-Orrin"></a>
-Hatch said when introducing S. 483,<a name="DOCF37" href="#FOOT37">(37)</a> a
1995 bill to increase the term of copyright by 20 years:
-</p>
-<blockquote class="smallquotation">
-<p>I believe we are now at such a point with respect to the question of
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ For example, here is what Senator
+ <a name="index-Hatch_002c-Senator-Orrin">
+ </a>
+ Hatch said when introducing S. 483,
+ <a href="#FOOT37" name="DOCF37">
+ (37)
+ </a>
+ a 1995 bill to increase the term of copyright by 20 years:
+ </p>
+ <blockquote class="smallquotation">
+ <p>
+ I believe we are now at such a point with respect to the question of
whether the current term of copyright adequately protects the
interests of authors and the related question of whether the term of
protection continues to provide a sufficient incentive for the
-creation of new works of authorship.<a name="DOCF38" href="#FOOT38">(38)</a>
-</p>
-</blockquote>
-
-<p>This bill extended the copyright on already published works written
+creation of new works of authorship.
+ <a href="#FOOT38" name="DOCF38">
+ (38)
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ </blockquote>
+ <p>
+ This bill extended the copyright on already published works written
since the 1920s. This change was a giveaway to publishers with no
possible benefit to the public, since there is no way to retroactively
increase now the number of books published back then. Yet it cost the
public a freedom that is meaningful today—the freedom to
redistribute books from that era.
-</p>
-<p>The bill also extended the copyrights of works yet to be written. For
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The bill also extended the copyrights of works yet to be written. For
works made for hire, copyright would last 95 years instead of the
present 75 years. Theoretically this would increase the incentive to
write new works; but any publisher that claims to need this extra
incentive should be required to substantiate the claim with projected
balance sheets for 75 years in the future.
-</p>
-<p>Needless to say, Congress did not question the publishers’ arguments:
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Needless to say, Congress did not question the publishers’ arguments:
a law extending copyright was enacted in 1998. It was officially
-called the
-<a name="index-Sonny-Bono-Copyright-Term-Extension-Act-_0028also-known-as"></a>
-the Mickey Mouse Copyright Act<em>)</em>
-Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act, named after one of
+called the
+ <a name="index-Sonny-Bono-Copyright-Term-Extension-Act-_0028also-known-as">
+ </a>
+ the Mickey Mouse Copyright Act
+ <em>
+ )
+ </em>
+ Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act, named after one of
its sponsors who died earlier that year. We usually call it the
Mickey Mouse Copyright Act, since we presume its real motive was to
prevent the copyright on the appearance of Mickey Mouse from expiring.
Bono’s widow, who served the rest of his term, made this statement:
-</p>
-<blockquote class="smallquotation">
-<p>Actually,
-<a name="index-Bono_002c-Congressman-Sonny"></a>
-Sonny wanted the term of copyright protection to last forever.
+ </p>
+ <blockquote class="smallquotation">
+ <p>
+ Actually,
+ <a name="index-Bono_002c-Congressman-Sonny">
+ </a>
+ Sonny wanted the term of copyright protection to last forever.
I am informed by staff that such a change would violate the Constitution.
I invite all of you to work with me to strengthen our copyright laws in
-all of the ways available to us. As you know, there is also
-<a name="index-Valenti_002c-Jack"></a>
-Jack Valenti’s<a name="DOCF39" href="#FOOT39">(39)</a> proposal for term to
last forever less one
+all of the ways available to us. As you know, there is also
+ <a name="index-Valenti_002c-Jack">
+ </a>
+ Jack Valenti’s
+ <a href="#FOOT39" name="DOCF39">
+ (39)
+ </a>
+ proposal for term to last forever less one
day. Perhaps the Committee may look at
-that next Congress.<a name="DOCF40" href="#FOOT40">(40)</a>
-</p>
-</blockquote>
-
-<a name="index-Supreme-Court_002c-US-2"></a>
-<p>The Supreme Court later heard a case that sought to overturn the law
+that next Congress.
+ <a href="#FOOT40" name="DOCF40">
+ (40)
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ </blockquote>
+ <a name="index-Supreme-Court_002c-US-2">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The Supreme Court later heard a case that sought to overturn the law
on the grounds that the retroactive extension fails to serve the
Constitution’s goal of promoting progress. The court responded by
abdicating its responsibility to judge the question; on copyright, the
Constitution requires only lip service.
-<a name="index-copyright_002c-duration-of-term-of-1"></a>
-</p>
-<p>Another law, passed in 1997, made it a felony to make sufficiently many
+ <a name="index-copyright_002c-duration-of-term-of-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Another law, passed in 1997, made it a felony to make sufficiently many
copies of any published work, even if you give them away to friends just
to be nice. Previously this was not a crime in the US at all.
-</p>
-<a name="index-DMCA_002c-publishers-and"></a>
-<p>An even worse law, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), was
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-DMCA_002c-publishers-and">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ An even worse law, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), was
designed to bring back copy protection (which computer users detest)
by making it a crime to break copy protection, or even publish
information about how to break it. This law ought to be called the
@@ -434,42 +528,54 @@ law. It says they can impose any restrictions whatsoever
on the use
of a work, and these restrictions take the force of law provided the
work contains some sort of encryption or license manager to enforce
them.
-</p>
-<p>One of the arguments offered for this bill was that it would implement
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ One of the arguments offered for this bill was that it would implement
a recent treaty to increase copyright powers. The treaty was
-promulgated by the
-<a
name="index-World-_0060_0060Intellectual-Property_0027_0027-Organization-_0028WIPO_0029-_0028see-also-_0060_0060intellectual-property_0027_0027_0029-3"></a>
-World “Intellectual
+promulgated by the
+ <a
name="index-World-_0060_0060Intellectual-Property_0027_0027-Organization-_0028WIPO_0029-_0028see-also-_0060_0060intellectual-property_0027_0027_0029-3">
+ </a>
+ World “Intellectual
Property” Organization, an organization dominated by
copyright- and patent-holding interests, with the aid of
-pressure from the
-<a name="index-Clinton-administration"></a>
-Clinton administration; since the treaty only
+pressure from the
+ <a name="index-Clinton-administration">
+ </a>
+ Clinton administration; since the treaty only
increases copyright power, whether it serves the public interest in
any country is doubtful. In any case, the bill went far beyond what
the treaty required.
-</p>
-<a
name="index-libraries_002c-DMCA_002c-fair-use_002c-and-_0028see-also-DMCA_0029"></a>
-<p>Libraries were a key source of opposition to this bill, especially to
+ </p>
+ <a
name="index-libraries_002c-DMCA_002c-fair-use_002c-and-_0028see-also-DMCA_0029">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Libraries were a key source of opposition to this bill, especially to
the aspects that block the forms of copying that are considered
-<a name="index-copyright_002c-fair-use-and-libraries"></a>
-fair use. How did the publishers respond? Former
-representative
-<a name="index-Schroeder_002c-Pat"></a>
-Pat Schroeder, now a lobbyist for the
-<a name="index-copyright_002c-Association-of-American-Publishers"></a>
-<a
name="index-Association-of-American-Publishers-_0028see-also-copyright_0029"></a>
-Association of
+ <a name="index-copyright_002c-fair-use-and-libraries">
+ </a>
+ fair use. How did the publishers respond? Former
+representative
+ <a name="index-Schroeder_002c-Pat">
+ </a>
+ Pat Schroeder, now a lobbyist for the
+ <a name="index-copyright_002c-Association-of-American-Publishers">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-Association-of-American-Publishers-_0028see-also-copyright_0029">
+ </a>
+ Association of
American Publishers, said that the publishers “could not live
with what [the libraries were] asking for.” Since the libraries
were asking only to preserve part of the status quo, one might respond
by wondering how the publishers had survived until the present
day.
-</p>
-<a name="index-copyright_002c-disregard-for-US-Constitution_0027s-view-of"></a>
-<p>Congressman
-<a name="index-Frank_002c-Congressman-Barney"></a>
-Barney Frank, in a meeting with me and others who opposed
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-copyright_002c-disregard-for-US-Constitution_0027s-view-of">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Congressman
+ <a name="index-Frank_002c-Congressman-Barney">
+ </a>
+ Barney Frank, in a meeting with me and others who opposed
this bill, showed how far the US Constitution’s view of copyright
has been disregarded. He said that new powers, backed by criminal
penalties, were needed urgently because the “movie industry is
@@ -481,52 +587,67 @@ to give up their rights for the public interest!” The
“industry” has been identified with the “creative
people” it hires, copyright has been treated as its entitlement,
and the Constitution has been turned upside down.
-<a name="index-Constitution_002c-copyright-and-US-1"></a>
-</p>
-<a name="index-DMCA_002c-and-fair-use"></a>
-<p>The DMCA was enacted in 1998. As enacted, it says that fair use remains
+ <a name="index-Constitution_002c-copyright-and-US-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-DMCA_002c-and-fair-use">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The DMCA was enacted in 1998. As enacted, it says that fair use remains
nominally legitimate, but allows publishers to prohibit all software or
hardware that you could practice it with. Effectively, fair use
is prohibited.
-</p>
-<p>Based on this law, the movie industry has imposed censorship on free
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Based on this law, the movie industry has imposed censorship on free
software for reading and playing DVDs, and even on the information
-about how to read them. In April 2001, Professor
-<a name="index-Felten_002c-Edward"></a>
-Edward Felten of
+about how to read them. In April 2001, Professor
+ <a name="index-Felten_002c-Edward">
+ </a>
+ Edward Felten of
Princeton University was intimidated by lawsuit threats from the
-<a name="index-Recording-Industry-Association-of-America-_0028RIAA_0029"></a>
-Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) into withdrawing a
+ <a name="index-Recording-Industry-Association-of-America-_0028RIAA_0029">
+ </a>
+ Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) into withdrawing a
scientific paper stating what he had learned about a proposed
encryption system for restricting access to recorded music.
-</p>
-<a name="index-libraries_002c-e_002dbooks-and"></a>
-<a name="index-e_002dbooks"></a>
-<p>We are also beginning to see e-books that take away many of readers’
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-libraries_002c-e_002dbooks-and">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-e_002dbooks">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ We are also beginning to see e-books that take away many of readers’
traditional freedoms—for instance, the freedom to lend a book
to your friend, to sell it to a used book store, to borrow it from a
library, to buy it without giving your name to a corporate data bank,
even the freedom to read it twice. Encrypted e-books generally
restrict all these activities—you can read them only with
special secret software designed to restrict you.
-</p>
-<p>I will never buy one of these encrypted, restricted e-books, and I
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ I will never buy one of these encrypted, restricted e-books, and I
hope you will reject them too. If an e-book doesn’t give you the same
freedoms as a traditional paper book, don’t accept it!
-</p>
-<p>Anyone independently releasing software that can read restricted
-e-books risks prosecution. A Russian programmer,
-<a name="index-Sklyarov_002c-Dmitry"></a>
-Dmitry Sklyarov, was
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Anyone independently releasing software that can read restricted
+e-books risks prosecution. A Russian programmer,
+ <a name="index-Sklyarov_002c-Dmitry">
+ </a>
+ Dmitry Sklyarov, was
arrested in 2001 while visiting the US to speak at a conference,
-because he had written such a program in
-<a name="index-Russia-1"></a>
-Russia, where it was lawful
+because he had written such a program in
+ <a name="index-Russia-1">
+ </a>
+ Russia, where it was lawful
to do so. Now Russia is preparing a law to prohibit it too, and the
-<a name="index-European-Union-1"></a>
-European Union recently adopted one.
-</p>
-<p>Mass-market e-books have been a commercial failure so far, but not
+ <a name="index-European-Union-1">
+ </a>
+ European Union recently adopted one.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Mass-market e-books have been a commercial failure so far, but not
because readers chose to defend their freedom; they were unattractive
for other reasons, such as that computer display screens are not easy
surfaces to read from. We can’t rely on this happy accident to
@@ -535,86 +656,114 @@ use “electronic paper”—book-like objects into
which an encrypted, restricted e-book can be downloaded. If this
paper-like surface proves more appealing than today’s display screens,
we will have to defend our freedom in order to keep it. Meanwhile,
-e-books are making inroads in niches:
-<a name="index-NYU-1"></a>
-NYU and other dental schools
+e-books are making inroads in niches:
+ <a name="index-NYU-1">
+ </a>
+ NYU and other dental schools
require students to buy their textbooks in the form of restricted
e-books.
-<a name="index-e_002dbooks-1"></a>
-</p>
-<p>The media companies are not satisfied yet. In 2001,
-<a name="index-Disney-1"></a>
-Disney-funded
-Senator
-<a name="index-Hollings_002c-Senator-Ernest-1"></a>
-Hollings proposed a bill called the
-<a
name="index-Security-Systems-Standards-and-Certification-Act-_0028SSSCA_0029-_0028see-also-Consumer-Broadband-and-Digital-Television-Promotion-Act-_0028CBDTPA_0029_0029-1"></a>
-“Security Systems
+ <a name="index-e_002dbooks-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The media companies are not satisfied yet. In 2001,
+ <a name="index-Disney-1">
+ </a>
+ Disney-funded
+Senator
+ <a name="index-Hollings_002c-Senator-Ernest-1">
+ </a>
+ Hollings proposed a bill called the
+ <a
name="index-Security-Systems-Standards-and-Certification-Act-_0028SSSCA_0029-_0028see-also-Consumer-Broadband-and-Digital-Television-Promotion-Act-_0028CBDTPA_0029_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ “Security Systems
Standards and Certification Act”
-(SSSCA),<a name="DOCF41" href="#FOOT41">(41)</a> which would require all
computers
+(SSSCA),
+ <a href="#FOOT41" name="DOCF41">
+ (41)
+ </a>
+ which would require all computers
(and other digital recording and playback devices) to have
government-mandated copy-restriction systems. That is their ultimate
goal, but the first item on their agenda is to prohibit any equipment
-that can tune digital
-<a name="index-HDTV"></a>
-HDTV unless it is designed to be impossible for
+that can tune digital
+ <a name="index-HDTV">
+ </a>
+ HDTV unless it is designed to be impossible for
the public to “tamper with” (i.e., modify for their own
purposes). Since free software is software that users can modify, we
face here for the first time a proposed law that explicitly prohibits
free software for a certain job. Prohibition of other jobs will
-surely follow. If the
-<a name="index-FCC"></a>
-FCC adopts this rule, existing free software
-such as
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Radio"></a>
-GNU Radio would be censored.
-</p>
-<p>To block these bills and rules requires political
-action.<a name="DOCF42" href="#FOOT42">(42)</a>
-</p>
-<a name="Finding-the-Right-Bargain"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Finding the Right Bargain </h3>
-
-<a name="index-copyright_002c-_0060_0060copyright-bargain_0027_0027-2"></a>
-<p>What is the proper way to decide copyright policy? If copyright is a
+surely follow. If the
+ <a name="index-FCC">
+ </a>
+ FCC adopts this rule, existing free software
+such as
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Radio">
+ </a>
+ GNU Radio would be censored.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ To block these bills and rules requires political
+action.
+ <a href="#FOOT42" name="DOCF42">
+ (42)
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <a name="Finding-the-Right-Bargain">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Finding the Right Bargain
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-copyright_002c-_0060_0060copyright-bargain_0027_0027-2">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ What is the proper way to decide copyright policy? If copyright is a
bargain made on behalf of the public, it should serve the public
interest above all. The government’s duty when selling the public’s
freedom is to sell only what it must, and sell it as dearly as possible.
At the very least, we should pare back the extent of copyright as much
as possible while maintaining a comparable level of publication.
-</p>
-<p>Since we cannot find this minimum price in freedom through competitive
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Since we cannot find this minimum price in freedom through competitive
bidding, as we do for construction projects, how can we find it?
-</p>
-<p>One possible method is to reduce copyright privileges in stages, and
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ One possible method is to reduce copyright privileges in stages, and
observe the results. By seeing if and when measurable diminutions in
publication occur, we will learn how much copyright power is really
necessary to achieve the public’s purposes. We must judge this by
actual observation, not by what publishers say will happen, because
they have every incentive to make exaggerated predictions of doom if
their powers are reduced in any way.
-</p>
-<p>Copyright policy includes several independent dimensions, which can be
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Copyright policy includes several independent dimensions, which can be
adjusted separately. After we find the necessary minimum for one policy
dimension, it may still be possible to reduce other dimensions of
copyright while maintaining the desired publication level.
-</p>
-<p>One important dimension of copyright is its duration, which is now
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ One important dimension of copyright is its duration, which is now
typically on the order of a century. Reducing the monopoly on copying
to ten years, starting from the date when a work is published, would be
a good first step. Another aspect of copyright, which covers the
making of derivative works, could continue for a longer period.
-</p>
-<a name="index-copyright_002c-duration-of-term-of-2"></a>
-<p>Why count from the date of publication? Because copyright on
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-copyright_002c-duration-of-term-of-2">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Why count from the date of publication? Because copyright on
unpublished works does not directly limit readers’ freedom; whether we
are free to copy a work is moot when we do not have copies. So giving
authors a longer time to get a work published does no harm. Authors
(who generally do own the copyright prior to publication) will rarely
choose to delay publication just to push back the end of the copyright
term.
-</p>
-<p>Why ten years? Because that is a safe proposal; we can be confident on
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Why ten years? Because that is a safe proposal; we can be confident on
practical grounds that this reduction would have little impact on the
overall viability of publishing today. In most media and genres,
successful works are very profitable in just a few years, and even
@@ -623,14 +772,16 @@ reference works, whose useful life may be many decades,
ten-year
copyright should suffice: updated editions are issued regularly, and
many readers will buy the copyrighted current edition rather than copy a
ten-year-old public domain version.
-</p>
-<p>Ten years may still be longer than necessary; once things settle down,
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Ten years may still be longer than necessary; once things settle down,
we could try a further reduction to tune the system. At a panel on
copyright at a literary convention, where I proposed the ten-year term,
a noted fantasy author sitting beside me objected vehemently, saying
that anything beyond five years was intolerable.
-</p>
-<p>But we don’t have to apply the same time span to all kinds of works.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ But we don’t have to apply the same time span to all kinds of works.
Maintaining the utmost uniformity of copyright policy is not crucial
to the public interest, and copyright law already has many exceptions
for specific uses and media. It would be foolish to pay for every
@@ -638,19 +789,23 @@ highway project at the rates necessary for the most
difficult projects
in the most expensive regions of the country; it is equally foolish to
“pay” for all kinds of art with the greatest price in
freedom that we find necessary for any one kind.
-</p>
-<p>So perhaps novels, dictionaries, computer programs, songs, symphonies,
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ So perhaps novels, dictionaries, computer programs, songs, symphonies,
and movies should have different durations of copyright, so that we can
reduce the duration for each kind of work to what is necessary for many
such works to be published. Perhaps movies over one hour long could
have a 20-year copyright, because of the expense of producing them.
In my own field, computer programming, three years should suffice,
because product cycles are even shorter than that.
-</p>
-<p>Another dimension of copyright policy is the extent of
-<a name="index-copyright_002c-fair-use-1"></a>
-<a name="index-fair-use-_0028see-also-copyright_0029-1"></a>
-fair use: some
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Another dimension of copyright policy is the extent of
+ <a name="index-copyright_002c-fair-use-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-fair-use-_0028see-also-copyright_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ fair use: some
ways of reproducing all or part of a published work that are legally
permitted even though it is copyrighted. The natural first step in
reducing this dimension of copyright power is to permit occasional
@@ -660,15 +815,17 @@ police into people’s private lives, but would probably
have little
effect on the sales of published works. (It may be necessary to take
other legal steps to ensure that shrink-wrap licenses cannot be used
to substitute for copyright in restricting such copying.) The
-experience of
-<a name="index-Napster"></a>
-Napster shows that we should also permit noncommercial
+experience of
+ <a name="index-Napster">
+ </a>
+ Napster shows that we should also permit noncommercial
verbatim redistribution to the general public—when so many of
the public want to copy and share, and find it so useful, only
draconian measures will stop them, and the public deserves to get what
it wants.
-</p>
-<p>For novels, and in general for works that are used for entertainment,
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ For novels, and in general for works that are used for entertainment,
noncommercial verbatim redistribution may be sufficient freedom for
the readers. Computer programs, being used for functional purposes
(to get jobs done), call for additional freedoms beyond that,
@@ -677,72 +834,163 @@ Software Definition,” in this book, for an explanation
of the
freedoms that software users should have. But it may be an acceptable
compromise for these freedoms to be universally available only after a
delay of two or three years from the program’s publication.
-</p>
-<p>Changes like these could bring copyright into line with the public’s
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Changes like these could bring copyright into line with the public’s
wish to use digital technology to copy. Publishers will no doubt find
these proposals “unbalanced”; they may threaten to take
their marbles and go home, but they won’t really do it, because the
game will remain profitable and it will be the only game in town.
-</p>
-<p>As we consider reductions in copyright power, we must make sure media
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ As we consider reductions in copyright power, we must make sure media
companies do not simply replace it with end-user license agreements.
It would be necessary to prohibit the use of contracts to apply
restrictions on copying that go beyond those of copyright. Such
limitations on what mass-market nonnegotiated contracts can require
are a standard part of the US legal system.
-<a name="index-copyright_002c-_0060_0060copyright-bargain_0027_0027-3"></a>
-</p>
-<a name="A-Personal-Note"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> A Personal Note </h3>
-
-<a
name="index-call-to-action_002c-do-not-surrender-freedom-in-author_0027s-name"></a>
-<a
name="index-users_002c-premise-of-author-supremacy-_0028see-also-ownership_0029-4"></a>
-<p>I am a software designer, not a legal scholar. I’ve become concerned
+ <a name="index-copyright_002c-_0060_0060copyright-bargain_0027_0027-3">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <a name="A-Personal-Note">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ A Personal Note
+ </h3>
+ <a
name="index-call-to-action_002c-do-not-surrender-freedom-in-author_0027s-name">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-users_002c-premise-of-author-supremacy-_0028see-also-ownership_0029-4">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ I am a software designer, not a legal scholar. I’ve become concerned
with copyright issues because there’s no avoiding them in the world of
computer networks, such as the Internet. As a user of computers and networks
for 30 years, I value the freedoms that we have lost, and the ones we
may lose next. As an author, I can reject the romantic mystique of the
author as semidivine creator, often cited by publishers to justify
increased copyright powers for authors—powers which these authors
will then sign away to publishers.
-</p>
-<p>Most of this article consists of facts and reasoning that you can
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Most of this article consists of facts and reasoning that you can
check, and proposals on which you can form your own opinions. But I ask
you to accept one thing on my word alone: that authors like me don’t
deserve special power over you. If you wish to reward me further for
the software or books I have written, I would gratefully accept a
check—but please don’t surrender your freedom in my name.
-</p><div class="footnote">
-<hr><h3>Footnotes</h3>
-<h3><a name="FOOT36" href="#DOCF36">(36)</a></h3>
-<a name="index-Fox-Film-Corp_002e-v_002e-Doyal-1"></a>
-<p><cite>Fox Film Corp. v. Doyal,</cite> 286 US 123, 1932.
-</p><h3><a name="FOOT37" href="#DOCF37">(37)</a></h3>
-<p><cite>Congressional Record,</cite> S. 483, “The Copyright Term Extension
Act of 1995,” 2 March 1995, pp. S3390–4.
-</p><h3><a name="FOOT38" href="#DOCF38">(38)</a></h3>
-<p><cite>Congressional
-Record,</cite> “Statement on Introduced Bills and Joint Resolutions,”
+ </p>
+ <div class="footnote">
+ <hr>
+ <h3>
+ Footnotes
+ </h3>
+ <h3>
+ <a href="#DOCF36" name="FOOT36">
+ (36)
+ </a>
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-Fox-Film-Corp_002e-v_002e-Doyal-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ <cite>
+ Fox Film Corp. v. Doyal,
+ </cite>
+ 286 US 123, 1932.
+ </p>
+ <h3>
+ <a href="#DOCF37" name="FOOT37">
+ (37)
+ </a>
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ <cite>
+ Congressional Record,
+ </cite>
+ S. 483, “The Copyright Term Extension Act of 1995,” 2 March 1995, pp.
S3390–4.
+ </p>
+ <h3>
+ <a href="#DOCF38" name="FOOT38">
+ (38)
+ </a>
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ <cite>
+ Congressional
+Record,
+ </cite>
+ “Statement on Introduced Bills and Joint Resolutions,”
2 March 1995, p. S3390,
-<a
href="http://gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CREC-1995-03-02/pdf/CREC-1995-03-02-pt1-PgS3390-2.pdf";>http://gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CREC-1995-03-02/pdf/CREC-1995-03-02-pt1-PgS3390-2.pdf</a>.
-</p><h3><a name="FOOT39" href="#DOCF39">(39)</a></h3>
-<p>Jack Valenti was a longtime president of the Motion
+ <a
href="http://gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CREC-1995-03-02/pdf/CREC-1995-03-02-pt1-PgS3390-2.pdf";>
+
http://gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CREC-1995-03-02/pdf/CREC-1995-03-02-pt1-PgS3390-2.pdf
+ </a>
+ .
+ </p>
+ <h3>
+ <a href="#DOCF39" name="FOOT39">
+ (39)
+ </a>
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ Jack Valenti was a longtime president of the Motion
Picture Association of America.
-</p><h3><a name="FOOT40" href="#DOCF40">(40)</a></h3>
-<p><cite>Congressional Record,</cite> remarks of
+ </p>
+ <h3>
+ <a href="#DOCF40" name="FOOT40">
+ (40)
+ </a>
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ <cite>
+ Congressional Record,
+ </cite>
+ remarks of
Rep.
-<a name="index-Bono_002c-Congresswoman-Mary"></a>
-Bono, 7 October 1998, p. H9952, <a
href="http://gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CREC-1998-10-07/pdf/CREC-1998-10-07-pt1-PgH9946.pdf";>http://gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CREC-1998-10-07/pdf/CREC-1998-10-07-pt1-PgH9946.pdf</a>.
-</p><h3><a name="FOOT41" href="#DOCF41">(41)</a></h3>
-<p>Since renamed to the unpronounceable
-<a
name="index-Consumer-Broadband-and-Digital-Television-Promotion-Act-_0028CBDTPA_0029-2"></a>
-CBDTPA,
+ <a name="index-Bono_002c-Congresswoman-Mary">
+ </a>
+ Bono, 7 October 1998, p. H9952,
+ <a
href="http://gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CREC-1998-10-07/pdf/CREC-1998-10-07-pt1-PgH9946.pdf";>
+
http://gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CREC-1998-10-07/pdf/CREC-1998-10-07-pt1-PgH9946.pdf
+ </a>
+ .
+ </p>
+ <h3>
+ <a href="#DOCF41" name="FOOT41">
+ (41)
+ </a>
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ Since renamed to the unpronounceable
+ <a
name="index-Consumer-Broadband-and-Digital-Television-Promotion-Act-_0028CBDTPA_0029-2">
+ </a>
+ CBDTPA,
for which a good mnemonic is “Consume, But Don’t Try
Programming Anything,” but it really stands for the
“Consumer Broadband and Digital Television Promotion
Act.”
-</p><h3><a name="FOOT42" href="#DOCF42">(42)</a></h3>
-<p>If you would like to help, I recommend the web
-sites
-<a name="index-Defective-by-Design-_0028see-also-DRM_0029-2"></a>
-<a href="http://defectivebydesign.org";>http://defectivebydesign.org</a>, <a
href="http://publicknowledge.org";>http://publicknowledge.org</a>, and <a
href="http://eff.org";>http://eff.org</a>.
-</p></div>
-<hr size="2"></section></body></html>
+ </p>
+ <h3>
+ <a href="#DOCF42" name="FOOT42">
+ (42)
+ </a>
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ If you would like to help, I recommend the web
+sites
+ <a name="index-Defective-by-Design-_0028see-also-DRM_0029-2">
+ </a>
+ <a href="http://defectivebydesign.org";>
+ http://defectivebydesign.org
+ </a>
+ ,
+ <a href="http://publicknowledge.org";>
+ http://publicknowledge.org
+ </a>
+ , and
+ <a href="http://eff.org";>
+ http://eff.org
+ </a>
+ .
+ </p>
+ </hr>
+ </div>
+ <hr size="2"/>
+</section>
diff --git a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_19.html
b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_19.html
index 0e713fe..617f62b 100644
--- a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_19.html
+++ b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_19.html
@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
-<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/loose.dtd";>
-<html><!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
+<!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
Free Software Foundation
@@ -19,44 +18,25 @@ ISBN 978-0-9831592-0-9
Cover design by Rob Myers.
Cover photograph by Peter Hinely.
- --><!-- Created on February 18, 2016 by texi2html 1.82
-texi2html was written by:
- Lionel Cons <address@hidden> (original author)
- Karl Berry <address@hidden>
- Olaf Bachmann <address@hidden>
- and many others.
-Maintained by: Many creative people.
-Send bugs and suggestions to <address@hidden>
---><head><title>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 19. Science Must Push
Copyright Aside</title><meta name="description" content="This is the second
edition of Richard Stallman's collection of essays."><meta name="keywords"
content="Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 19. Science Must Push Copyright
Aside"><meta name="resource-type" content="document"><meta name="distribution"
content="global"><meta name="Generator" content="texi2html 1.82"><meta
http-equiv="Content-Type" content="t [...]
-<!--
-a.summary-letter {text-decoration: none}
-blockquote.smallquotation {font-size: smaller}
-pre.display {font-family: serif}
-pre.format {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-comment {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-preformatted {font-family: serif}
-pre.smalldisplay {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallexample {font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallformat {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smalllisp {font-size: smaller}
-span.roman {font-family:serif; font-weight:normal;}
-span.sansserif {font-family:sans-serif; font-weight:normal;}
-ul.toc {list-style: none}
--->
-</style><link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
href="../static/web-common/style.css"></head><body lang="en" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
text="#000000" link="#0000FF" vlink="#800080" alink="#FF0000" class="article">
+ -->
-<a name="Push-Cop-Aside"></a>
-<header><div id="logo"><a href="/"><img src="../static/gnu.svg" height="100"
width="100"></a></div><h1 class="book-title">Free Software, Free Society, 2nd
ed.</h1></header><section id="main"><a
name="Science-Must-Push-Copyright-Aside"></a>
-<h1 class="chapter"> 19. Science Must Push Copyright Aside </h1>
-
-<a name="index-libraries_002c-access-fees-and"></a>
-<p>It should be a truism that the scientific literature exists to
+<section id="main">
+ <a name="Science-Must-Push-Copyright-Aside">
+ </a>
+ <h1 class="chapter">
+ 19. Science Must Push Copyright Aside
+ </h1>
+ <a name="index-libraries_002c-access-fees-and">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ It should be a truism that the scientific literature exists to
disseminate scientific knowledge, and that scientific journals exist
to facilitate the process. It therefore follows that rules for use of
the scientific literature should be designed to help achieve that
goal.
-</p>
-<p>The rules we have now, known as copyright, were established in the
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The rules we have now, known as copyright, were established in the
age of the printing press, an inherently centralized method of
mass-production copying. In a print environment, copyright on journal
articles restricted only journal publishers—requiring them to
@@ -65,39 +45,45 @@ plagiarists. It helped journals to operate and disseminate
knowledge,
without interfering with the useful work of scientists or students,
either as writers or readers of articles. These rules fit that system
well.
-</p>
-<p>The modern technology for scientific publishing, however, is the
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The modern technology for scientific publishing, however, is the
World Wide Web. What rules would best ensure the maximum
dissemination of scientific articles, and knowledge, on the web?
Articles should be distributed in nonproprietary formats, with open
access for all. And everyone should have the right to
“mirror” articles—that is, to republish them verbatim
with proper attribution.
-</p>
-<p>These rules should apply to past as well as future articles, when
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ These rules should apply to past as well as future articles, when
they are distributed in electronic form. But there is no crucial need
to change the present copyright system as it applies to paper
publication of journals because the problem is not in that domain.
-</p>
-<p>Unfortunately, it seems that not everyone agrees with the truisms
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Unfortunately, it seems that not everyone agrees with the truisms
that began this article. Many journal publishers appear to believe
that the purpose of scientific literature is to enable them to publish
journals so as to collect subscriptions from scientists and
students. Such thinking is known as “confusion of the means with
the ends.”
-</p>
-<p>Their approach has been to restrict access even to read the
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Their approach has been to restrict access even to read the
scientific literature to those who can and will pay for it. They use
copyright law, which is still in force despite its inappropriateness
for computer networks, as an excuse to stop scientists from choosing
new rules.
-</p>
-<p>For the sake of scientific cooperation and humanity’s future, we
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ For the sake of scientific cooperation and humanity’s future, we
must reject that approach at its root—not merely the
obstructive systems that have been instituted, but the mistaken
priorities that inspired them.
-</p>
-<p>Journal publishers sometimes claim that online access requires
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Journal publishers sometimes claim that online access requires
expensive high-powered server machines, and that they must charge
access fees to pay for these servers. This “problem” is a
consequence of its own “solution.” Give everyone the
@@ -105,16 +91,19 @@ freedom to mirror, and libraries around the world will set
up mirror
sites to meet the demand. This decentralized solution will reduce
network bandwidth needs and provide faster access, all the while
protecting the scholarly record against accidental loss.
-</p>
-<p>Publishers also argue that paying the editors requires charging for
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Publishers also argue that paying the editors requires charging for
access. Let us accept the assumption that editors must be paid; this
tail need not wag the dog. The cost of editing for a typical paper is
between 1 percent and 3 percent of the cost of funding the research to produce
it. Such a small percentage of the cost can hardly justify obstructing
the use of the results.
-</p>
-<a name="index-universities-3"></a>
-<p>Instead, the cost of editing could be recovered, for example,
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-universities-3">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Instead, the cost of editing could be recovered, for example,
through page charges to the authors, who can pass these on to the
research sponsors. The sponsors should not mind, given that they
currently pay for publication in a more cumbersome way, through
@@ -125,20 +114,27 @@ access. The occasional author who is not affiliated with
an
institution or company, and who has no research sponsor, could be
exempted from page charges, with costs levied on institution-based
authors.
-</p>
-<p>Another justification for access fees to online publications is to
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Another justification for access fees to online publications is to
fund conversion of the print archives of a journal into online
form. That work needs to be done, but we should seek alternative ways
of funding it that do not involve obstructing access to the
result. The work itself will not be any more difficult, or cost any
more. It is self-defeating to digitize the archives and waste the
results by restricting access.
-</p>
-<a
name="index-call-to-action_002c-defend-progress-of-science-from-copyright"></a>
-<p>The
-<a name="index-Constitution_002c-copyright-and-US-2"></a>
-US Constitution says that copyright exists “to promote
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-defend-progress-of-science-from-copyright">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The
+ <a name="index-Constitution_002c-copyright-and-US-2">
+ </a>
+ US Constitution says that copyright exists “to promote
the Progress of Science.” When copyright impedes the progress of
science, science must push copyright out of the way.
-<a name="index-libraries_002c-access-fees-and-1"></a>
-</p><hr size="2"></section></body></html>
+ <a name="index-libraries_002c-access-fees-and-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <hr size="2"/>
+</section>
diff --git a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_2.html
b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_2.html
index a25aae6..add5f0a 100644
--- a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_2.html
+++ b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_2.html
@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
-<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/loose.dtd";>
-<html><!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
+<!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
Free Software Foundation
@@ -19,112 +18,122 @@ ISBN 978-0-9831592-0-9
Cover design by Rob Myers.
Cover photograph by Peter Hinely.
- --><!-- Created on February 18, 2016 by texi2html 1.82
-texi2html was written by:
- Lionel Cons <address@hidden> (original author)
- Karl Berry <address@hidden>
- Olaf Bachmann <address@hidden>
- and many others.
-Maintained by: Many creative people.
-Send bugs and suggestions to <address@hidden>
---><head><title>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 2. The GNU
Project</title><meta name="description" content="This is the second edition of
Richard Stallman's collection of essays."><meta name="keywords" content="Free
Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 2. The GNU Project"><meta name="resource-type"
content="document"><meta name="distribution" content="global"><meta
name="Generator" content="texi2html 1.82"><meta http-equiv="Content-Type"
content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><style type=" [...]
-<!--
-a.summary-letter {text-decoration: none}
-blockquote.smallquotation {font-size: smaller}
-pre.display {font-family: serif}
-pre.format {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-comment {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-preformatted {font-family: serif}
-pre.smalldisplay {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallexample {font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallformat {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smalllisp {font-size: smaller}
-span.roman {font-family:serif; font-weight:normal;}
-span.sansserif {font-family:sans-serif; font-weight:normal;}
-ul.toc {list-style: none}
--->
-</style><link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
href="../static/web-common/style.css"></head><body lang="en" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
text="#000000" link="#0000FF" vlink="#800080" alink="#FF0000" class="article">
+ -->
-<a name="GNU-Project"></a>
-<header><div id="logo"><a href="/"><img src="../static/gnu.svg" height="100"
width="100"></a></div><h1 class="book-title">Free Software, Free Society, 2nd
ed.</h1></header><section id="main"><a name="The-GNU-Project"></a>
-<h1 class="chapter"> 2. The GNU Project </h1>
-
-
-<a name="index-GNU-Project-_0028see-also-GNU_0029"></a>
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Project"></a>
-<a name="The-First-Software_002dSharing-Community"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> The First Software-Sharing Community </h3>
-
-<a
name="index-AI-_0028Artificial-Intelligence_0029-Lab_002c-MIT-_0028see-also-MIT_0029"></a>
-<p>When I started working at the MIT Artificial Intelligence Lab in 1971,
+<section id="main">
+ <a name="The-GNU-Project">
+ </a>
+ <h1 class="chapter">
+ 2. The GNU Project
+ </h1>
+ <a name="index-GNU-Project-_0028see-also-GNU_0029">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Project">
+ </a>
+ <a name="The-First-Software_002dSharing-Community">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ The First Software-Sharing Community
+ </h3>
+ <a
name="index-AI-_0028Artificial-Intelligence_0029-Lab_002c-MIT-_0028see-also-MIT_0029">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ When I started working at the MIT Artificial Intelligence Lab in 1971,
I became part of a software-sharing community that had existed for
many years. Sharing of software was not limited to our particular
community; it is as old as computers, just as sharing of recipes is as
old as cooking. But we did it more than most.
-</p>
-<p>The AI Lab used a timesharing operating system called
-<a name="index-ITS-_0028Incompatible-Timesharing-System_0029"></a>
-ITS (the
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The AI Lab used a timesharing operating system called
+ <a name="index-ITS-_0028Incompatible-Timesharing-System_0029">
+ </a>
+ ITS (the
Incompatible Timesharing System) that the lab’s staff
-<a name="index-hackers"></a>
-hackers<a name="DOCF2" href="#FOOT2">(2)</a> had designed
+ <a name="index-hackers">
+ </a>
+ hackers
+ <a href="#FOOT2" name="DOCF2">
+ (2)
+ </a>
+ had designed
and written in assembler language for the Digital PDP-10, one of the
large computers of the era. As a member of this community, an AI Lab
staff system hacker, my job was to improve this system.
-</p>
-<p>We did not call our software “free software,” because that
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ We did not call our software “free software,” because that
term did not yet exist; but that is what it was. Whenever people from
another university or a company wanted to port and use a program, we
gladly let them. If you saw someone using an unfamiliar and
interesting program, you could always ask to see the source code, so
that you could read it, change it, or cannibalize parts of it to make
a new program.
-</p>
-<a name="The-Collapse-of-the-Community"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> The Collapse of the Community </h3>
-
-<p>The situation changed drastically in the early 1980s when Digital
+ </p>
+ <a name="The-Collapse-of-the-Community">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ The Collapse of the Community
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ The situation changed drastically in the early 1980s when Digital
discontinued the PDP-10 series. Its architecture,
elegant and powerful in the 60s, could not extend naturally to the
larger address spaces that were becoming feasible in the 80s. This
meant that nearly all of the programs composing ITS were
obsolete.
-</p>
-
-<p>The AI Lab hacker community had already collapsed, not long before.
-In 1981, the spin-off company
-<a name="index-Symbolics"></a>
-Symbolics had hired away nearly all of
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The AI Lab hacker community had already collapsed, not long before.
+In 1981, the spin-off company
+ <a name="index-Symbolics">
+ </a>
+ Symbolics had hired away nearly all of
the hackers from the AI Lab, and the depopulated community was unable
-to maintain itself.
-<a name="index-Levy_002c-Steven"></a>
-(The book <cite>Hackers,</cite> by Steve Levy, describes
+to maintain itself.
+ <a name="index-Levy_002c-Steven">
+ </a>
+ (The book
+ <cite>
+ Hackers,
+ </cite>
+ by Steve Levy, describes
these events, as well as giving a clear picture of this community in
its prime.) When the AI Lab bought a new PDP-10 in 1982, its administrators
-decided to use Digital’s nonfree timesharing system instead of
-<a name="index-ITS-_0028Incompatible-Timesharing-System_0029-1"></a>
-ITS.
-</p>
-<p>The modern computers of the era, such as the
-<a name="index-VAX"></a>
-VAX or the
-<a name="index-68000_002dclass-hardware"></a>
-68020, had their own operating systems, but none of them were free software:
you
+decided to use Digital’s nonfree timesharing system instead of
+ <a name="index-ITS-_0028Incompatible-Timesharing-System_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ ITS.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The modern computers of the era, such as the
+ <a name="index-VAX">
+ </a>
+ VAX or the
+ <a name="index-68000_002dclass-hardware">
+ </a>
+ 68020, had their own operating systems, but none of them were free software:
you
had to sign a
-<a name="index-nondisclosure-agreements"></a>
-nondisclosure agreement even to get an executable copy.
-</p>
-<p>This meant that the first step in using a computer was to promise not
+ <a name="index-nondisclosure-agreements">
+ </a>
+ nondisclosure agreement even to get an executable copy.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ This meant that the first step in using a computer was to promise not
to help your neighbor. A cooperating community was forbidden. The
-rule made by the
-<a name="index-ownership_002c-and-damage-to-social-cohesion"></a>
-<a name="index-ownership_002c-and-users_0027-freedom"></a>
-owners of proprietary software was, “If you
+rule made by the
+ <a name="index-ownership_002c-and-damage-to-social-cohesion">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-ownership_002c-and-users_0027-freedom">
+ </a>
+ owners of proprietary software was, “If you
share with your neighbor, you are a pirate. If you want any changes,
beg us to make them.”
-</p>
-<a name="index-citizen-values_002c-proprietary-software-and"></a>
-<p>The idea that the proprietary software social system—the system that
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-citizen-values_002c-proprietary-software-and">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The idea that the proprietary software social system—the system that
says you are not allowed to share or change software—is antisocial,
that it is unethical, that it is simply wrong, may come as a surprise
to some readers. But what else could we say about a system based on
@@ -133,67 +142,88 @@ idea surprising may have taken the proprietary software
social system as
a given, or judged it on the terms suggested by proprietary software
businesses. Software publishers have worked long and hard to convince
people that there is only one way to look at the issue.
-</p>
-<a name="index-_0060_0060piracy_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term-1"></a>
-<p>When software publishers talk about “enforcing” their
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-_0060_0060piracy_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ When software publishers talk about “enforcing” their
“rights” or “stopping piracy,” what they
-actually <em>say</em> is secondary. The real message of these statements is
+actually
+ <em>
+ say
+ </em>
+ is secondary. The real message of these statements is
in the unstated assumptions they take for granted, which the public is
asked to accept without examination. Let’s therefore examine them.
-</p>
-<p>One assumption is that software companies have an unquestionable natural
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ One assumption is that software companies have an unquestionable natural
right to own software and thus have power over all its users. (If
this were a natural right, then no matter how much harm it does to the
-public, we could not object.) Interestingly, the
-<a name="index-Constitution_002c-US"></a>
-US Constitution and
+public, we could not object.) Interestingly, the
+ <a name="index-Constitution_002c-US">
+ </a>
+ US Constitution and
legal tradition reject this view; copyright is not a natural right,
but an artificial government-imposed monopoly that limits the users’
natural right to copy.
-</p>
-<p>Another unstated assumption is that the only important thing about
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Another unstated assumption is that the only important thing about
software is what jobs it allows you to do—that we computer users
should not care what kind of society we are allowed to have.
-</p>
-<p>A third assumption is that we would have no usable software (or would
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ A third assumption is that we would have no usable software (or would
never have a program to do this or that particular job) if we did not
offer a company power over the users of the program. This assumption
may have seemed plausible, before the free software movement
demonstrated that we can make plenty of useful software without
putting chains on it.
-</p>
-<p>If we decline to accept these assumptions, and judge these issues
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ If we decline to accept these assumptions, and judge these issues
based on ordinary commonsense morality while placing the users first,
we arrive at very different conclusions. Computer users should be
free to modify programs to fit their needs, and free to share
software, because helping other people is the basis of society.
-</p>
-<p>There is no room here for an extensive statement of the reasoning
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ There is no room here for an extensive statement of the reasoning
behind this conclusion, so I refer the reader to the article “Why
Software Should Not Have Owners” (address@hidden Free-pg}{).
-</p>
-<a name="A-Stark-Moral-Choice"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> A Stark Moral Choice </h3>
-
-<p>With my community gone, to continue as before was impossible.
+ </p>
+ <a name="A-Stark-Moral-Choice">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ A Stark Moral Choice
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ With my community gone, to continue as before was impossible.
Instead, I faced a stark moral choice.
-</p>
-<p>The easy choice was to join the proprietary software world, signing
-<a name="index-nondisclosure-agreements-1"></a>
-nondisclosure agreements and promising not to help my fellow
-<a name="index-hackers-1"></a>
-hacker.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The easy choice was to join the proprietary software world, signing
+ <a name="index-nondisclosure-agreements-1">
+ </a>
+ nondisclosure agreements and promising not to help my fellow
+ <a name="index-hackers-1">
+ </a>
+ hacker.
Most likely I would also be developing software that was released
under nondisclosure agreements, thus adding to the pressure on other
people to betray their fellows too.
-</p>
-<p>I could have made money this way, and perhaps amused myself writing
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ I could have made money this way, and perhaps amused myself writing
code. But I knew that at the end of my career, I would look back on
years of building walls to divide people, and feel I had spent my life
making the world a worse place.
-</p>
-<a name="index-MIT_002c-AI-_0028Artificial-Intelligence_0029-Lab"></a>
-<p>I had already experienced being on the receiving end of a
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-MIT_002c-AI-_0028Artificial-Intelligence_0029-Lab">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ I had already experienced being on the receiving end of a
nondisclosure agreement, when someone refused to give me and
the MIT AI Lab the source code for the control program
for our printer. (The lack of certain features in this program made
@@ -201,103 +231,146 @@ use of the printer extremely frustrating.) So I could
not tell myself
that nondisclosure agreements were innocent. I was very angry when he
refused to share with us; I could not turn around and do the same
thing to everyone else.
-</p>
-<p>Another choice, straightforward but unpleasant, was to leave the
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Another choice, straightforward but unpleasant, was to leave the
computer field. That way my skills would not be misused, but they
would still be wasted. I would not be culpable for dividing and
restricting computer users, but it would happen nonetheless.
-</p>
-<a name="index-call-to-action_002c-contribute-to-GNU"></a>
-<p>So I looked for a way that a programmer could do something for the
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-contribute-to-GNU">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ So I looked for a way that a programmer could do something for the
good. I asked myself, was there a program or programs that I could
write, so as to make a community possible once again?
-</p>
-<a name="index-GNU-_0028see-also-both-software-and-GNU_0029"></a>
-<p>The answer was clear: what was needed first was an operating system.
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-GNU-_0028see-also-both-software-and-GNU_0029">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The answer was clear: what was needed first was an operating system.
That is the crucial software for starting to use a computer. With an
operating system, you can do many things; without one, you cannot run
the computer at all. With a free operating system, we could again
-have a community of cooperating
-<a name="index-hackers-2"></a>
-hackers—and invite anyone to join.
+have a community of cooperating
+ <a name="index-hackers-2">
+ </a>
+ hackers—and invite anyone to join.
And anyone would be able to use a computer without starting out by
conspiring to deprive his or her friends.
-</p>
-<a name="index-developers_002c-_0028see-also-programmers_0029"></a>
-<p>As an operating system developer, I had the right skills for this job.
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-developers_002c-_0028see-also-programmers_0029">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ As an operating system developer, I had the right skills for this job.
So even though I could not take success for granted, I realized that I
-was elected to do the job.
-<a name="index-Unix-compatibility_002c-reason-for"></a>
-I chose to make the system compatible with
+was elected to do the job.
+ <a name="index-Unix-compatibility_002c-reason-for">
+ </a>
+ I chose to make the system compatible with
Unix so that it would be portable, and so that Unix users could easily
-switch to it. The name GNU was chosen, following a
-<a name="index-hackers-3"></a>
-hacker tradition, as
-a recursive acronym for
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-acronym"></a>
-“GNU’s Not Unix.”
-</p>
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-operating-system-parts"></a>
-<p>An operating system does not mean just a kernel, barely enough to run
+switch to it. The name GNU was chosen, following a
+ <a name="index-hackers-3">
+ </a>
+ hacker tradition, as
+a recursive acronym for
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-acronym">
+ </a>
+ “GNU’s Not Unix.”
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-operating-system-parts">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ An operating system does not mean just a kernel, barely enough to run
other programs. In the 1970s, every operating system worthy of the
name included command processors, assemblers, compilers, interpreters,
-debuggers, text editors, mailers, and much more.
-<a name="index-ITS-_0028Incompatible-Timesharing-System_0029-2"></a>
-ITS had them,
-<a name="index-Multics"></a>
-Multics had them,
-<a name="index-VMS"></a>
-VMS had them, and Unix had them. The GNU
+debuggers, text editors, mailers, and much more.
+ <a name="index-ITS-_0028Incompatible-Timesharing-System_0029-2">
+ </a>
+ ITS had them,
+ <a name="index-Multics">
+ </a>
+ Multics had them,
+ <a name="index-VMS">
+ </a>
+ VMS had them, and Unix had them. The GNU
operating system would include them too.
-</p>
-<p>Later I heard these words, attributed to
-<a name="index-Hillel-_0028the-Elder_0029"></a>
-Hillel:<a name="DOCF3" href="#FOOT3">(3)</a>
-</p>
-<blockquote class="smallquotation"><p> If I am not for myself, who will be
for me?<br>
- If I am only for myself, what am I?<br>
- If not now, when?<br></p></blockquote>
-
-<p>The decision to start the GNU Project was based on a similar spirit.
-</p>
-<a name="Free-as-in-Freedom"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Free as in Freedom </h3>
-
-<p>The term “free software” is sometimes misunderstood—it
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Later I heard these words, attributed to
+ <a name="index-Hillel-_0028the-Elder_0029">
+ </a>
+ Hillel:
+ <a href="#FOOT3" name="DOCF3">
+ (3)
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <blockquote class="smallquotation">
+ <p>
+ If I am not for myself, who will be for me?
+ <br>
+ If I am only for myself, what am I?
+ <br>
+ If not now, when?
+ <br/>
+ </br>
+ </br>
+ </p>
+ </blockquote>
+ <p>
+ The decision to start the GNU Project was based on a similar spirit.
+ </p>
+ <a name="Free-as-in-Freedom">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Free as in Freedom
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ The term “free software” is sometimes misunderstood—it
has nothing to do with price. It is about freedom. Here, therefore,
is the definition of free software.
-</p>
-<p>A program is free software, for you, a particular user, if:
-</p><ul><li>
-You have the freedom to run the program as you wish, for any purpose.
-
-</li><li>
-You have the freedom to modify the program to suit your needs. (To
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ A program is free software, for you, a particular user, if:
+ </p>
+ <ul>
+ <li>
+ You have the freedom to run the program as you wish, for any purpose.
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ You have the freedom to modify the program to suit your needs. (To
make this freedom effective in practice, you must have access to the
source code, since making changes in a program without having the
source code is exceedingly difficult.)
-
-</li><li>
-You have the freedom to redistribute copies, either gratis or for a
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ You have the freedom to redistribute copies, either gratis or for a
fee.
-
-</li><li>
-<a name="index-copyleft_002c-modified-versions"></a>
-You have the freedom to distribute modified versions of the program,
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ <a name="index-copyleft_002c-modified-versions">
+ </a>
+ You have the freedom to distribute modified versions of the program,
so that the community can benefit from your improvements.
-
-</li></ul><a name="index-development_002c-fundraising"></a>
-<a name="index-selling_002c-free-software"></a>
-<p>Since “free” refers to freedom, not to price, there is no
+ </li>
+ </ul>
+ <a name="index-development_002c-fundraising">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-selling_002c-free-software">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Since “free” refers to freedom, not to price, there is no
contradiction between selling copies and free software. In fact, the
freedom to sell copies is crucial: collections of free software sold
on CD-ROMs are important for the community, and selling them is an
important way to raise funds for free software development.
Therefore, a program which people are not free to include on these
collections is not free software.
-</p>
-<a
name="index-_0060_0060free-software_002c_0027_0027-unambiguous-translations-of"></a>
-<p>Because of the ambiguity of “free,” people have long
+ </p>
+ <a
name="index-_0060_0060free-software_002c_0027_0027-unambiguous-translations-of">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Because of the ambiguity of “free,” people have long
looked for alternatives, but no one has found a better term.
The English language has more words and nuances than any other, but it
lacks a simple, unambiguous, word that means “free,” as in
@@ -305,35 +378,47 @@ freedom—“unfettered” being the word that comes closest in
meaning. Such alternatives as “liberated,”
“freedom,” and “open” have either the wrong
meaning or some other disadvantage.
-</p>
-<a name="GNU-Software-and-the-GNU-System"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> GNU Software and the GNU System </h3>
-
-<a
name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-software_002c-as-distinguished-from-the-GNU-system"></a>
-<p>Developing a whole system is a very large project. To bring it into
+ </p>
+ <a name="GNU-Software-and-the-GNU-System">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ GNU Software and the GNU System
+ </h3>
+ <a
name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-software_002c-as-distinguished-from-the-GNU-system">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Developing a whole system is a very large project. To bring it into
reach, I decided to adapt and use existing pieces of free software
wherever that was possible. For example, I decided at the very
-beginning to use
-<a name="index-TeX"></a>
-TeX as the principal text formatter; a few years
-later, I decided to use the
-<a name="index-X-Window-System"></a>
-X Window System rather than writing
+beginning to use
+ <a name="index-TeX">
+ </a>
+ TeX as the principal text formatter; a few years
+later, I decided to use the
+ <a name="index-X-Window-System">
+ </a>
+ X Window System rather than writing
another window system for GNU.
-</p>
-<p>Because of this decision, the GNU system is not the same as the
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Because of this decision, the GNU system is not the same as the
collection of all
GNU software. The GNU system includes programs that are not GNU
software, programs that were developed by other people and projects
for their own purposes, but which we can use because they are free
software.
-</p>
-<a name="Commencing-the-Project"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Commencing the Project </h3>
-
-<a name="index-MIT_002c-AI-_0028Artificial-Intelligence_0029-Lab-1"></a>
-<a name="index-universities_002c-releasing-free-software-at"></a>
-<p>In January 1984 I quit my job at MIT and began writing GNU
+ </p>
+ <a name="Commencing-the-Project">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Commencing the Project
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-MIT_002c-AI-_0028Artificial-Intelligence_0029-Lab-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-universities_002c-releasing-free-software-at">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ In January 1984 I quit my job at MIT and began writing GNU
software. Leaving MIT was necessary so that MIT would not be able to
interfere with distributing GNU as free software. If I had remained on
the staff, MIT could have claimed to own the work, and could have
@@ -341,88 +426,123 @@ imposed their own distribution terms, or even turned the
work into a
proprietary software package. I had no intention of doing a large
amount of work only to see it become useless for its intended purpose:
creating a new software-sharing community.
-</p>
-<p>However, Professor
-<a name="index-Winston_002c-Patrick"></a>
-Winston, then the head of the MIT AI
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ However, Professor
+ <a name="index-Winston_002c-Patrick">
+ </a>
+ Winston, then the head of the MIT AI
Lab, kindly invited me to keep using the lab’s facilities.
-</p>
-<a name="The-First-Steps"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> The First Steps </h3>
-
-<a name="index-Free-University-Compiler-Kit-_0028VUCK_0029"></a>
-<p>Shortly before beginning the GNU Project, I heard about the Free
+ </p>
+ <a name="The-First-Steps">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ The First Steps
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-Free-University-Compiler-Kit-_0028VUCK_0029">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Shortly before beginning the GNU Project, I heard about the Free
University Compiler Kit, also known as VUCK. (The Dutch word for
-“free” is written with a <em>v.</em>) This was a compiler designed
+“free” is written with a
+ <em>
+ v.
+ </em>
+ ) This was a compiler designed
to handle multiple languages, including
-C and
-<a name="index-Pascal"></a>
-Pascal, and to support
+C and
+ <a name="index-Pascal">
+ </a>
+ Pascal, and to support
multiple target machines. I wrote to its author asking if GNU could
use it.
-</p>
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-operating-system-parts-1"></a>
-<p>He responded derisively, stating that the university was free but the
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-operating-system-parts-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ He responded derisively, stating that the university was free but the
compiler was not. I therefore decided that my first program for the
GNU Project would be a multilanguage, multiplatform compiler.
-</p>
-<a name="index-Pastel_002c-compiler"></a>
-<p>Hoping to avoid the need to write the whole compiler myself, I
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-Pastel_002c-compiler">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Hoping to avoid the need to write the whole compiler myself, I
obtained the source code for the Pastel compiler, which was a
-multiplatform compiler developed at
-<a name="index-Lawrence-Livermore-Lab"></a>
-Lawrence Livermore Lab. It
+multiplatform compiler developed at
+ <a name="index-Lawrence-Livermore-Lab">
+ </a>
+ Lawrence Livermore Lab. It
supported, and was written in, an extended version of Pascal, designed
-to be a system-programming language. I added a
-<a name="index-C"></a>
-C front end, and began
-porting it to the
-<a name="index-Motorola"></a>
-<a name="index-68000_002dclass-hardware-1"></a>
-Motorola 68000 computer. But I had to give that
+to be a system-programming language. I added a
+ <a name="index-C">
+ </a>
+ C front end, and began
+porting it to the
+ <a name="index-Motorola">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-68000_002dclass-hardware-1">
+ </a>
+ Motorola 68000 computer. But I had to give that
up when I discovered that the compiler needed many megabytes of stack
space, while the available 68000 Unix system would only allow 64k.
-</p>
-<p>I then realized that the Pastel compiler functioned by parsing the
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ I then realized that the Pastel compiler functioned by parsing the
entire input file into a syntax tree, converting the whole syntax tree
into a chain of “instructions,” and then generating the
whole output file, without ever freeing any storage. At this point, I
concluded I would have to write a new compiler from scratch. That new
-compiler is now known as
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GCC"></a>
-GCC; none of the Pastel compiler is used in it,
+compiler is now known as
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GCC">
+ </a>
+ GCC; none of the Pastel compiler is used in it,
but I managed to adapt and use the C front end that I had written.
-But that was some years later; first, I worked on
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Emacs"></a>
-<a name="index-Emacs_002c-GNU"></a>
-GNU Emacs.
-</p>
-<a name="GNU-Emacs"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> GNU Emacs </h3>
-
-<p>I began work on GNU Emacs in September 1984, and in early 1985 it was
+But that was some years later; first, I worked on
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Emacs">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Emacs_002c-GNU">
+ </a>
+ GNU Emacs.
+ </p>
+ <a name="GNU-Emacs">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ GNU Emacs
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ I began work on GNU Emacs in September 1984, and in early 1985 it was
beginning to be usable. This enabled me to begin using Unix systems
-to do editing; having no interest in learning to use
-<a name="index-vi"></a>
-vi or
-<a name="index-ed"></a>
-ed, I had done my editing on other kinds of machines until then.
-</p>
-<p>At this point, people began wanting to use GNU Emacs, which raised the
+to do editing; having no interest in learning to use
+ <a name="index-vi">
+ </a>
+ vi or
+ <a name="index-ed">
+ </a>
+ ed, I had done my editing on other kinds of machines until then.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ At this point, people began wanting to use GNU Emacs, which raised the
question of how to distribute it. Of course, I put it on the
anonymous ftp server on the MIT computer that I used. (This computer,
-<a name="index-prep_002eai_002emit_002eedu"></a>
-<code>prep.ai.mit.edu</code>, thus became the principal
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-ftp-distribution-site"></a>
-GNU ftp distribution site;
+ <a name="index-prep_002eai_002emit_002eedu">
+ </a>
+ <code>
+ prep.ai.mit.edu
+ </code>
+ , thus became the principal
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-ftp-distribution-site">
+ </a>
+ GNU ftp distribution site;
when it was decommissioned a few years later, we transferred the name
to our new ftp server.) But at that time, many of the interested
people were not on the Internet and could not get a copy by ftp. So
the question was, what would I say to them?
-</p>
-<a name="index-programmers_002c-income-for"></a>
-
-<p>I could have said, “Find a friend who is on the net and who will make
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-programmers_002c-income-for">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ I could have said, “Find a friend who is on the net and who will make
a copy for you.” Or I could have done what I did with the original
PDP-10 Emacs: tell them, “Mail me a tape and a SASE (self-addressed
stamped envelope), and I will mail it back with Emacs on it.” But I
@@ -431,41 +551,54 @@ software. So I announced that I would mail a tape to
whoever wanted
one, for a fee of $150. In this way, I started a free software
distribution business, the precursor of the companies that today
distribute entire Linux-based GNU systems.
-</p>
-<a name="Is-a-Program-Free-for-Every-User_003f"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Is a Program Free for Every User? </h3>
-
-<a name="index-copyleft_002c-modified-versions-1"></a>
-<p>If a program is free software when it leaves the hands of its author,
+ </p>
+ <a name="Is-a-Program-Free-for-Every-User_003f">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Is a Program Free for Every User?
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-copyleft_002c-modified-versions-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ If a program is free software when it leaves the hands of its author,
this does not necessarily mean it will be free software for everyone
-who has a copy of it. For example,
-<a name="index-public-domain-software-_0028see-also-software_0029"></a>
-public domain software (software
+who has a copy of it. For example,
+ <a name="index-public-domain-software-_0028see-also-software_0029">
+ </a>
+ public domain software (software
that is not copyrighted) is free software; but anyone can make a
proprietary modified version of it. Likewise, many free programs are
copyrighted but distributed under simple permissive licenses which
allow proprietary modified versions.
-</p>
-<a name="index-X-Window-System-1"></a>
-<a name="index-MIT_002c-X-Window-System-and"></a>
-<p>The paradigmatic example of this problem is the X Window System.
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-X-Window-System-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-MIT_002c-X-Window-System-and">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The paradigmatic example of this problem is the X Window System.
Developed at MIT, and released as free software with a
permissive license, it was soon adopted by various computer companies.
They added X to their proprietary Unix systems, in binary form only,
-and covered by the same
-<a name="index-nondisclosure-agreements-2"></a>
-nondisclosure agreement. These copies of X
+and covered by the same
+ <a name="index-nondisclosure-agreements-2">
+ </a>
+ nondisclosure agreement. These copies of X
were no more free software than Unix was.
-</p>
-<a name="index-developers_002c-proprietary-software"></a>
-<a name="index-proprietary-software_002c-paradox-of-permissive-license"></a>
-<p>The developers of the X Window System did not consider this a
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-developers_002c-proprietary-software">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-proprietary-software_002c-paradox-of-permissive-license">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The developers of the X Window System did not consider this a
problem—they expected and intended this to happen. Their goal was
not freedom, just “success,” defined as “having many
users.” They did not care whether these users had freedom, only
about having many of them.
-</p>
-<p>This led to a paradoxical situation where two different ways of
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ This led to a paradoxical situation where two different ways of
counting the amount of freedom gave different answers to the question,
“Is this program free?” If you judged based on the freedom
provided by the distribution terms of the MIT release,
@@ -473,47 +606,62 @@ you would say that X was free software. But if you
measured the
freedom of the average user of X, you would have to say it was
proprietary software. Most X users were running the proprietary
versions that came with Unix systems, not the free version.
-</p>
-<a name="Copyleft-and-the-GNU-GPL"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Copyleft and the GNU GPL </h3>
-
-<a name="index-GPL_002c-copyleft-and"></a>
-<a name="index-copyleft_002c-GPL-and"></a>
-<p>The goal of GNU was to give users freedom, not just to be popular. So
+ </p>
+ <a name="Copyleft-and-the-GNU-GPL">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Copyleft and the GNU GPL
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-GPL_002c-copyleft-and">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-copyleft_002c-GPL-and">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The goal of GNU was to give users freedom, not just to be popular. So
we needed to use distribution terms that would prevent GNU software
from being turned into proprietary software. The method we use is
-called “copyleft.”<a name="DOCF4" href="#FOOT4">(4)</a>
-</p>
-<p>Copyleft uses copyright law, but flips it over to serve the opposite
+called “copyleft.”
+ <a href="#FOOT4" name="DOCF4">
+ (4)
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Copyleft uses copyright law, but flips it over to serve the opposite
of its usual purpose: instead of a means for restricting a program, it
becomes a means for keeping the program free.
-</p>
-<p>The central idea of copyleft is that we give everyone permission to
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The central idea of copyleft is that we give everyone permission to
run the program, copy the program, modify the program, and distribute
modified versions—but not permission to add restrictions of their
own. Thus, the crucial freedoms that define “free
software” are guaranteed to everyone who has a copy; they become
inalienable rights.
-</p>
-<p>For an effective copyleft, modified versions must also be free. This
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ For an effective copyleft, modified versions must also be free. This
ensures that work based on ours becomes available to our community if
it is published. When programmers who have jobs as programmers
volunteer to improve GNU software, it is copyleft that prevents their
employers from saying, “You can’t share those changes, because
we are going to use them to make our proprietary version of the
program.”
-<a name="index-copyleft_002c-modified-versions-2"></a>
-</p>
-<p>The requirement that changes must be free is essential if we want to
+ <a name="index-copyleft_002c-modified-versions-2">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The requirement that changes must be free is essential if we want to
ensure freedom for every user of the program. The companies that
privatized the X Window System usually made some changes to port it to
their systems and hardware. These changes were small compared with
the great extent of X, but they were not trivial. If making changes
were an excuse to deny the users freedom, it would be easy for anyone
to take advantage of the excuse.
-<a name="index-X-Window-System-2"></a>
-</p>
-<p>A related issue concerns combining a free program with nonfree code.
+ <a name="index-X-Window-System-2">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ A related issue concerns combining a free program with nonfree code.
Such a combination would inevitably be nonfree; whichever freedoms
are lacking for the nonfree part would be lacking for the whole as
well. To permit such combinations would open a hole big enough to
@@ -521,25 +669,37 @@ sink a ship. Therefore, a crucial requirement for
copyleft is to plug
this hole: anything added to or combined with a copylefted program
must be such that the larger combined version is also free and
copylefted.
-</p>
-<p>The specific implementation of copyleft that we use for most GNU
-software is the
-<a name="index-GPL"></a>
-GNU General Public License, or GNU GPL for short. We
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The specific implementation of copyleft that we use for most GNU
+software is the
+ <a name="index-GPL">
+ </a>
+ GNU General Public License, or GNU GPL for short. We
have other kinds of copyleft that are used in specific circumstances.
GNU manuals are copylefted also, but use a much simpler kind of
copyleft, because the complexity of the GNU GPL is not necessary
-for manuals.<a name="DOCF5" href="#FOOT5">(5)</a>) for documentation.
-
-<a name="index-copyleft_002c-GPL-and-1"></a>
-<a name="index-GPL_002c-copyleft-and-1"></a>
-</p>
-<a name="The-Free-Software-Foundation"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> The Free Software Foundation </h3>
-
-<a
name="index-Free-Software-Foundation-_0028FSF_0029-_0028see-also-FSF_0029"></a>
-<a name="index-development_002c-funding-for"></a>
-<p>As interest in using Emacs was growing, other people became involved
+for manuals.
+ <a href="#FOOT5" name="DOCF5">
+ (5)
+ </a>
+ ) for documentation.
+ <a name="index-copyleft_002c-GPL-and-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GPL_002c-copyleft-and-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <a name="The-Free-Software-Foundation">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ The Free Software Foundation
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-Free-Software-Foundation-_0028FSF_0029-_0028see-also-FSF_0029">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-development_002c-funding-for">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ As interest in using Emacs was growing, other people became involved
in the GNU Project, and we decided that it was time to seek funding
once again. So in 1985 we created the Free Software Foundation (FSF), a
tax-exempt charity for free software development. The
@@ -547,200 +707,284 @@ FSF also took over the
Emacs tape distribution business; later it extended this by adding
other free software (both GNU and non-GNU) to the tape, and by selling
free manuals as well.
-</p>
-<p>Most of the FSF’s income used to come from sales of copies of free
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Most of the FSF’s income used to come from sales of copies of free
software and of other related services (CD-ROMs of source code,
CD-ROMs with binaries, nicely printed manuals, all with the freedom to
-redistribute and modify), and
-<a name="index-Deluxe-Distributions_002c-FSF"></a>
-<a name="index-FSF_002c-Deluxe-Distributions"></a>
-<a name="index-FSF_002c-fundraising"></a>
-Deluxe Distributions (distributions for
+redistribute and modify), and
+ <a name="index-Deluxe-Distributions_002c-FSF">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-FSF_002c-Deluxe-Distributions">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-FSF_002c-fundraising">
+ </a>
+ Deluxe Distributions (distributions for
which we built the whole collection of software for the customer’s
choice of platform). Today the FSF
still sells manuals and other
gear, but it gets the bulk of its funding from members’ dues. You
-can join the FSF at <a href="http://fsf.org/join";>http://fsf.org/join</a>.
-</p>
-<p>Free Software Foundation employees have written and maintained a
-number of GNU software packages. Two notable ones are the
-<a name="index-C-library"></a>
-<a name="index-libraries-_0028comp_002e_0029_002c-C"></a>
-C library
-and the shell. The
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-C-Library"></a>
-<a
name="index-libraries-_0028comp_002e_0029_002c-GNU-C-Library-_0028see-also-GNU_0029"></a>
-GNU C library is what every program running on a
+can join the FSF at
+ <a href="http://fsf.org/join";>
+ http://fsf.org/join
+ </a>
+ .
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Free Software Foundation employees have written and maintained a
+number of GNU software packages. Two notable ones are the
+ <a name="index-C-library">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-libraries-_0028comp_002e_0029_002c-C">
+ </a>
+ C library
+and the shell. The
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-C-Library">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-libraries-_0028comp_002e_0029_002c-GNU-C-Library-_0028see-also-GNU_0029">
+ </a>
+ GNU C library is what every program running on a
GNU/Linux system uses to communicate with Linux. It was developed by a
-member of the Free Software Foundation staff,
-<a name="index-McGrath_002c-Roland"></a>
-Roland McGrath.
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-BASH-_0028Bourne-Again-Shell_0029"></a>
-<a name="index-BASH-_0028Bourne-Again-Shell_0029_002c-GNU"></a>
-The
+member of the Free Software Foundation staff,
+ <a name="index-McGrath_002c-Roland">
+ </a>
+ Roland McGrath.
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-BASH-_0028Bourne-Again-Shell_0029">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-BASH-_0028Bourne-Again-Shell_0029_002c-GNU">
+ </a>
+ The
shell used on most GNU/Linux systems is BASH, the Bourne Again
-Shell,<a name="DOCF6" href="#FOOT6">(6)</a> which was developed by
-FSF employee
-<a name="index-Fox_002c-Brian"></a>
-Brian Fox.
-</p>
-<p>We funded development of these programs because the GNU Project was
+Shell,
+ <a href="#FOOT6" name="DOCF6">
+ (6)
+ </a>
+ which was developed by
+FSF employee
+ <a name="index-Fox_002c-Brian">
+ </a>
+ Brian Fox.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ We funded development of these programs because the GNU Project was
not just about tools or a development environment. Our goal was a
complete operating system, and these programs were needed for that
goal.
-</p>
-<a name="Free-Software-Support"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Free Software Support </h3>
-
-<p>The free software philosophy rejects a specific widespread business
+ </p>
+ <a name="Free-Software-Support">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Free Software Support
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ The free software philosophy rejects a specific widespread business
practice, but it is not against business. When businesses respect the
users’ freedom, we wish them success.
-</p>
-<a name="index-programmers_002c-income-for-1"></a>
-<a name="index-selling_002c-free-software-1"></a>
-<p>Selling copies of Emacs demonstrates one kind of free software
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-programmers_002c-income-for-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-selling_002c-free-software-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Selling copies of Emacs demonstrates one kind of free software
business. When the FSF took over that business, I needed
another way to make a living. I found it in selling services relating
to the free software I had developed. This included teaching, for
subjects such as how to program GNU Emacs and how to
-customize
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GCC-1"></a>
-GCC, and software development, mostly
+customize
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GCC-1">
+ </a>
+ GCC, and software development, mostly
porting GCC to new platforms.
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Emacs-1"></a>
-<a name="index-Emacs_002c-GNU-1"></a>
-</p>
-<p>Today each of these kinds of free software business is practiced by a
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Emacs-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Emacs_002c-GNU-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Today each of these kinds of free software business is practiced by a
number of corporations. Some distribute free software collections on
CD-ROM; others sell support at levels ranging from answering user
questions, to fixing bugs, to adding major new features. We are even
beginning to see free software companies based on launching new free
software products.
-</p>
-<a name="index-_0060_0060open_002c_0027_0027-misleading-use-of-term"></a>
-<a name="index-traps_002c-_0060_0060open-source_0027_0027"></a>
-<a name="index-citizen-values_002c-convenience-v_002e"></a>
-<p>Watch out, though—a number of companies that associate themselves
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-_0060_0060open_002c_0027_0027-misleading-use-of-term">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-traps_002c-_0060_0060open-source_0027_0027">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-citizen-values_002c-convenience-v_002e">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Watch out, though—a number of companies that associate themselves
with the term “open source” actually base their business
on nonfree software that works with free software. These are not
free software companies, they are proprietary software companies whose
products tempt users away from freedom. They call these programs
“value-added packages,” which shows the values they
would like us to adopt: convenience above freedom. If we value freedom
-more, we should
-<a
name="index-call-to-action_002c-use-correct-terminology-_0028see-also-terminology_0029-1"></a>
-call them “freedom-subtracted” packages.
-<a
name="index-Free-Software-Foundation-_0028FSF_0029-_0028see-also-FSF_0029-1"></a>
-<a name="index-development_002c-funding-for-1"></a>
-</p>
-<a name="Technical-Goals"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Technical Goals </h3>
-
-<p>The principal goal of GNU is to be free software. Even if GNU had no
+more, we should
+ <a
name="index-call-to-action_002c-use-correct-terminology-_0028see-also-terminology_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ call them “freedom-subtracted” packages.
+ <a
name="index-Free-Software-Foundation-_0028FSF_0029-_0028see-also-FSF_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-development_002c-funding-for-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <a name="Technical-Goals">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Technical Goals
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ The principal goal of GNU is to be free software. Even if GNU had no
technical advantage over Unix, it would have a social advantage,
allowing users to cooperate, and an ethical advantage, respecting the
user’s freedom.
-</p>
-<p>But it was natural to apply the known standards of good practice to
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ But it was natural to apply the known standards of good practice to
the work—for example, dynamically allocating data structures to avoid
arbitrary fixed size limits, and handling all the possible 8-bit codes
wherever that made sense.
-</p>
-<p>In addition, we rejected the Unix focus on small memory size, by
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ In addition, we rejected the Unix focus on small memory size, by
deciding not to support 16-bit machines (it was clear that 32-bit
machines would be the norm by the time the GNU system was finished),
and to make no effort to reduce memory usage unless it exceeded a
megabyte. In programs for which handling very large files was not
crucial, we encouraged programmers to read an entire input file into
core, then scan its contents without having to worry about I/O.
-</p>
-<p>These decisions enabled many GNU programs to surpass their Unix
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ These decisions enabled many GNU programs to surpass their Unix
counterparts in reliability and speed.
-</p>
-<a name="Donated-Computers"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Donated Computers </h3>
-
-<a name="index-development_002c-contributions-and-donations"></a>
-<p>As the GNU Project’s reputation grew, people began offering to donate
+ </p>
+ <a name="Donated-Computers">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Donated Computers
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-development_002c-contributions-and-donations">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ As the GNU Project’s reputation grew, people began offering to donate
machines running Unix to the project. These were very useful, because
the easiest way to develop components of GNU was to do it on a Unix
system, and replace the components of that system one by one. But
they raised an ethical issue: whether it was right for us to have a
copy of Unix at all.
-</p>
-<p>Unix was (and is) proprietary software, and the GNU Project’s
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Unix was (and is) proprietary software, and the GNU Project’s
philosophy said that we should not use proprietary software. But,
applying the same reasoning that leads to the conclusion that violence
in self defense is justified, I concluded that it was legitimate to
use a proprietary package when that was crucial for developing a free
replacement that would help others stop using the proprietary package.
-</p>
-<p>But, even if this was a justifiable evil, it was still an evil. Today
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ But, even if this was a justifiable evil, it was still an evil. Today
we no longer have any copies of Unix, because we have replaced them
with free operating systems. If we could not replace a machine’s
operating system with a free one, we replaced the machine instead.
-</p>
-<a name="The-GNU-Task-List"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> The GNU Task List </h3>
-
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Task-List"></a>
-<p>As the GNU Project proceeded, and increasing numbers of system
+ </p>
+ <a name="The-GNU-Task-List">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ The GNU Task List
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Task-List">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ As the GNU Project proceeded, and increasing numbers of system
components were found or developed, eventually it became useful to
-make a list of the remaining gaps. We used it to recruit
-<a name="index-developers_002c-GNU-Project"></a>
-developers
+make a list of the remaining gaps. We used it to recruit
+ <a name="index-developers_002c-GNU-Project">
+ </a>
+ developers
to write the missing pieces. This list became known as the GNU Task
List. In addition to missing Unix components, we listed various
other useful software and documentation projects that, we thought, a
truly complete system ought to have.
-</p>
-<p>Today,<a name="DOCF7" href="#FOOT7">(7)</a> hardly any Unix components are
left in the GNU Task List—those
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Today,
+ <a href="#FOOT7" name="DOCF7">
+ (7)
+ </a>
+ hardly any Unix components are left in the GNU Task List—those
jobs had been done, aside from a few inessential ones. But the list
is full of projects that some might call “applications.”
Any program that appeals to more than a narrow class of users would be
a useful thing to add to an operating system.
-</p>
-<a name="index-games_002c-Unix-compatibility-and"></a>
-<p>Even games are included in the task list—and have been since the
-beginning.
-<a name="index-Unix-compatibility_002c-games-and"></a>
-Unix included games, so naturally GNU should too. But
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-games_002c-Unix-compatibility-and">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Even games are included in the task list—and have been since the
+beginning.
+ <a name="index-Unix-compatibility_002c-games-and">
+ </a>
+ Unix included games, so naturally GNU should too. But
compatibility was not an issue for games, so we did not follow the
list of games that Unix had. Instead, we listed a spectrum of
different kinds of games that users might like.
-</p>
-<a name="The-GNU-Library-GPL"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> The GNU Library GPL </h3>
-
-<a name="index-LGPL_002c-GNU-C-library-and"></a>
-<a name="index-developers_002c-collaboration-between"></a>
-<p>The GNU C library uses a special kind of copyleft called the GNU
-Library General Public License,<a name="DOCF8" href="#FOOT8">(8)</a> which
gives permission to link
+ </p>
+ <a name="The-GNU-Library-GPL">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ The GNU Library GPL
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-LGPL_002c-GNU-C-library-and">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-developers_002c-collaboration-between">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The GNU C library uses a special kind of copyleft called the GNU
+Library General Public License,
+ <a href="#FOOT8" name="DOCF8">
+ (8)
+ </a>
+ which gives permission to link
proprietary software with the library. Why make this exception?
-</p>
-<p>It is not a matter of principle; there is no principle that says
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ It is not a matter of principle; there is no principle that says
proprietary software products are entitled to include our code. (Why
contribute to a project predicated on refusing to share with us?)
-Using the LGPL for the
-<a name="index-C-library-1"></a>
-<a name="index-libraries-_0028comp_002e_0029_002c-C-1"></a>
-C library, or for any library, is a matter of
+Using the LGPL for the
+ <a name="index-C-library-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-libraries-_0028comp_002e_0029_002c-C-1">
+ </a>
+ C library, or for any library, is a matter of
strategy.
-</p>
-<a name="index-C-library-2"></a>
-<a name="index-libraries-_0028comp_002e_0029_002c-C-2"></a>
-<p>The C library does a generic job; every proprietary system or compiler
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-C-library-2">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-libraries-_0028comp_002e_0029_002c-C-2">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The C library does a generic job; every proprietary system or compiler
comes with a C library. Therefore, to make our C library available
only to free software would not have given free software any
advantage—it would only have discouraged use of our library.
-</p>
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-C-Library-1"></a>
-<a
name="index-libraries-_0028comp_002e_0029_002c-GNU-C-Library-_0028see-also-GNU_0029-1"></a>
-<p>One system is an exception to this: on the GNU system (and this
-includes GNU/Linux), the GNU C library is the only
-<a name="index-C-library-3"></a>
-<a name="index-libraries-_0028comp_002e_0029_002c-C-3"></a>
-C library. So the
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-C-Library-1">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-libraries-_0028comp_002e_0029_002c-GNU-C-Library-_0028see-also-GNU_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ One system is an exception to this: on the GNU system (and this
+includes GNU/Linux), the GNU C library is the only
+ <a name="index-C-library-3">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-libraries-_0028comp_002e_0029_002c-C-3">
+ </a>
+ C library. So the
distribution terms of the GNU C library determine whether it is
possible to compile a proprietary program for the GNU system.
There is no ethical reason to allow proprietary applications on the GNU
@@ -748,305 +992,430 @@ system, but strategically it seems that disallowing
them would do more
to discourage use of the GNU system than to encourage development of
free applications. That is why using the Library GPL is a good
strategy for the C library.
-</p>
-<p>For other libraries, the strategic decision needs to be
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ For other libraries, the strategic decision needs to be
considered on a case-by-case basis. When a library does a special job
that can help write certain kinds of programs, then releasing it under
the GPL, limiting it to free programs only, is a way of helping other
free software developers, giving them an advantage against proprietary
software.
-</p>
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Readline"></a>
-<a
name="index-Readline_002c-GNU-_0028see-also-libraries-_0028comp_002e_0029_002c-GNU_0029"></a>
-<a name="index-libraries-_0028comp_002e_0029_002c-GNU"></a>
-<a name="index-BASH-_0028Bourne-Again-Shell_0029_002c-GNU-1"></a>
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-BASH-_0028Bourne-Again-Shell_0029-1"></a>
-<p>Consider GNU Readline, a library that was developed to provide
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Readline">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-Readline_002c-GNU-_0028see-also-libraries-_0028comp_002e_0029_002c-GNU_0029">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-libraries-_0028comp_002e_0029_002c-GNU">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-BASH-_0028Bourne-Again-Shell_0029_002c-GNU-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-BASH-_0028Bourne-Again-Shell_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Consider GNU Readline, a library that was developed to provide
command-line editing for BASH. Readline is
-released under the ordinary
-<a name="index-GPL-1"></a>
-GNU GPL, not the Library GPL. This
+released under the ordinary
+ <a name="index-GPL-1">
+ </a>
+ GNU GPL, not the Library GPL. This
probably does reduce the amount Readline is used, but that is no loss
for us. Meanwhile, at least one useful application has been made free
software specifically so it could use Readline, and that is a real
gain for the community.
-</p>
-<p>Proprietary software developers have the advantages money provides;
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Proprietary software developers have the advantages money provides;
free software developers need to make advantages for each other. I
hope some day we will have a large collection of GPL-covered libraries
that have no parallel available to proprietary software, providing
useful modules to serve as building blocks in new free software, and
adding up to a major advantage for further free software development.
-<a name="index-developers_002c-collaboration-between-1"></a>
-<a name="index-LGPL_002c-GNU-C-library-and-1"></a>
-</p>
-<a name="Scratching-an-Itch_003f"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Scratching an Itch? </h3>
-
-<a name="index-developers_002c-incentive-for"></a>
-<a name="index-Raymond_002c-Eric"></a>
-<p>Eric Raymond<a name="DOCF9" href="#FOOT9">(9)</a>).
+ <a name="index-developers_002c-collaboration-between-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-LGPL_002c-GNU-C-library-and-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <a name="Scratching-an-Itch_003f">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Scratching an Itch?
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-developers_002c-incentive-for">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Raymond_002c-Eric">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Eric Raymond
+ <a href="#FOOT9" name="DOCF9">
+ (9)
+ </a>
+ ).
says that “Every good work of software
-starts by scratching a developer’s personal itch.”<a name="DOCF10"
href="#FOOT10">(10)</a> Maybe that happens sometimes, but many
-essential pieces of
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-software-_0028see-also-software_0029"></a>
-GNU software were developed in order to have a
+starts by scratching a developer’s personal itch.”
+ <a href="#FOOT10" name="DOCF10">
+ (10)
+ </a>
+ Maybe that happens sometimes, but many
+essential pieces of
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-software-_0028see-also-software_0029">
+ </a>
+ GNU software were developed in order to have a
complete free operating system. They come from a vision and a plan,
not from impulse.
-</p>
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-C-Library-2"></a>
-<p>For example, we developed the GNU C library because a Unix-like system
-needs a
-<a name="index-C-library-4"></a>
-<a name="index-libraries-_0028comp_002e_0029_002c-C-4"></a>
-C library, BASH
-because a Unix-like system needs a shell, and
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-tar"></a>
-GNU tar because a
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-C-Library-2">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ For example, we developed the GNU C library because a Unix-like system
+needs a
+ <a name="index-C-library-4">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-libraries-_0028comp_002e_0029_002c-C-4">
+ </a>
+ C library, BASH
+because a Unix-like system needs a shell, and
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-tar">
+ </a>
+ GNU tar because a
Unix-like system needs a tar program. The same is true for my own
-programs—the
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-C-compiler-_0028see-also-GNU_002c-GCC_0029"></a>
-GNU C compiler,
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Emacs-2"></a>
-<a name="index-Emacs_002c-GNU-2"></a>
-GNU Emacs,
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GDB"></a>
-GDB and
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Make"></a>
-GNU Make.
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-C-Library-3"></a>
-</p>
-<a name="index-BASH-_0028Bourne-Again-Shell_0029_002c-GNU-2"></a>
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-BASH-_0028Bourne-Again-Shell_0029-2"></a>
-
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-programs-developed-to-cope-with-specific-threats"></a>
-<p>Some GNU programs were developed to cope with specific threats to our
-freedom. Thus, we developed
-<a name="index-gzip"></a>
-gzip to replace the
-<a name="index-Compress-program"></a>
-Compress program,
+programs—the
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-C-compiler-_0028see-also-GNU_002c-GCC_0029">
+ </a>
+ GNU C compiler,
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Emacs-2">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Emacs_002c-GNU-2">
+ </a>
+ GNU Emacs,
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GDB">
+ </a>
+ GDB and
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Make">
+ </a>
+ GNU Make.
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-C-Library-3">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-BASH-_0028Bourne-Again-Shell_0029_002c-GNU-2">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-BASH-_0028Bourne-Again-Shell_0029-2">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-programs-developed-to-cope-with-specific-threats">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Some GNU programs were developed to cope with specific threats to our
+freedom. Thus, we developed
+ <a name="index-gzip">
+ </a>
+ gzip to replace the
+ <a name="index-Compress-program">
+ </a>
+ Compress program,
which had been lost to the community because of
-the
-<a
name="index-LZW-_0028Lempel_002dZiv_002dWelch_0029-data-compression-algorithm-_0028see-also-patents_0029"></a>
-LZW patents. We found
-people to develop
-<a name="index-LessTif-_0028see-also-Motif_0029"></a>
-LessTif, and more recently started
-<a name="index-GNOME-_0028GNU-Network-Object-Model-Environment_0029"></a>
-<a
name="index-GNU_002c-GNOME-_0028GNU-Network-Object-Model-Environment_0029"></a>
-GNOME and
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-Harmony"></a>
-<a name="index-Harmony"></a>
-Harmony, to address the problems caused by certain proprietary
-libraries (see below). We are developing the
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Privacy-Guard-_0028GPG_0029"></a>
-<a name="index-GPG-_0028GNU-Privacy-Guard_0029"></a>
-<a name="index-Privacy-Guard-_0028GPG_0029_002c-GNU"></a>
-GNU Privacy Guard to
+the
+ <a
name="index-LZW-_0028Lempel_002dZiv_002dWelch_0029-data-compression-algorithm-_0028see-also-patents_0029">
+ </a>
+ LZW patents. We found
+people to develop
+ <a name="index-LessTif-_0028see-also-Motif_0029">
+ </a>
+ LessTif, and more recently started
+ <a name="index-GNOME-_0028GNU-Network-Object-Model-Environment_0029">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-GNU_002c-GNOME-_0028GNU-Network-Object-Model-Environment_0029">
+ </a>
+ GNOME and
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-Harmony">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Harmony">
+ </a>
+ Harmony, to address the problems caused by certain proprietary
+libraries (see below). We are developing the
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Privacy-Guard-_0028GPG_0029">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GPG-_0028GNU-Privacy-Guard_0029">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Privacy-Guard-_0028GPG_0029_002c-GNU">
+ </a>
+ GNU Privacy Guard to
replace popular nonfree encryption software, because users should not
have to choose between privacy and freedom.
-</p>
-<p>Of course, the people writing these programs became interested in the
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Of course, the people writing these programs became interested in the
work, and many features were added to them by various people for the
sake of their own needs and interests. But that is not why the
programs exist.
-</p>
-<a name="Unexpected-Developments"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Unexpected Developments </h3>
-
-<p>At the beginning of the GNU Project, I imagined that we would develop
+ </p>
+ <a name="Unexpected-Developments">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Unexpected Developments
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ At the beginning of the GNU Project, I imagined that we would develop
the whole GNU system, then release it as a whole. That is not how it
happened.
-</p>
-<a name="index-Unix-compatibility_002c-GNU-Project-development-and"></a>
-<p>Since each component of the GNU system was implemented on a Unix
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-Unix-compatibility_002c-GNU-Project-development-and">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Since each component of the GNU system was implemented on a Unix
system, each component could run on Unix systems long before a
complete GNU system existed. Some of these programs became popular,
and users began extending them and porting them—to the various
incompatible versions of Unix, and sometimes to other systems as well.
-</p>
-<p>The process made these programs much more powerful, and attracted both
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The process made these programs much more powerful, and attracted both
funds and contributors to the GNU Project. But it probably also
delayed completion of a minimal working system by several years, as
-<a name="index-developers_002c-GNU-Project-1"></a>
-GNU developers’ time was put into maintaining these ports and adding
+ <a name="index-developers_002c-GNU-Project-1">
+ </a>
+ GNU developers’ time was put into maintaining these ports and adding
features to the existing components, rather than moving on to write
one missing component after another.
-<a name="index-Unix-compatibility_002c-GNU-Project-development-and-1"></a>
-</p>
-<a name="The-GNU-Hurd"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> The GNU Hurd </h3>
-
-<a name="index-Hurd_002c-GNU"></a>
-<a name="index-kernel_002c-GNU-Hurd"></a>
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Hurd"></a>
-<a name="index-Mach-microkernel"></a>
-<p>By 1990, the GNU system was almost complete; the only major missing
+ <a name="index-Unix-compatibility_002c-GNU-Project-development-and-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <a name="The-GNU-Hurd">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ The GNU Hurd
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-Hurd_002c-GNU">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-kernel_002c-GNU-Hurd">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Hurd">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Mach-microkernel">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ By 1990, the GNU system was almost complete; the only major missing
component was the kernel. We had decided to implement our kernel as a
collection of server processes running on top of Mach. Mach is a
-microkernel developed at
-<a name="index-Carnegie-Mellon-University"></a>
-Carnegie Mellon University and then at the
-<a name="index-University-of-Utah"></a>
-University of Utah; the GNU Hurd is a collection of servers (i.e., a
+microkernel developed at
+ <a name="index-Carnegie-Mellon-University">
+ </a>
+ Carnegie Mellon University and then at the
+ <a name="index-University-of-Utah">
+ </a>
+ University of Utah; the GNU Hurd is a collection of servers (i.e., a
herd of GNUs) that run on top of Mach, and do the
various jobs of the Unix kernel. The start of development was delayed
as we waited for Mach to be released as free software, as had been
promised.
-</p>
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-operating-system-parts-2"></a>
-<p>One reason for choosing this design was to avoid what seemed to be the
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-operating-system-parts-2">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ One reason for choosing this design was to avoid what seemed to be the
hardest part of the job: debugging a kernel program without a
source-level debugger to do it with. This part of the job had been
done already, in Mach, and we expected to debug the Hurd servers as
-user programs, with
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GDB-1"></a>
-GDB. But it took a long time to make that possible,
+user programs, with
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GDB-1">
+ </a>
+ GDB. But it took a long time to make that possible,
and the multithreaded servers that send messages to each other have
turned out to be very hard to debug. Making the Hurd work solidly has
stretched on for many years.
-</p>
-<a name="Alix"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Alix </h3>
-
-<a name="index-Hurd_002c-original-name-of"></a>
-<a name="index-Alix"></a>
-<p>The GNU kernel was not originally supposed to be called the Hurd. Its
+ </p>
+ <a name="Alix">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Alix
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-Hurd_002c-original-name-of">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Alix">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The GNU kernel was not originally supposed to be called the Hurd. Its
original name was Alix—named after the woman who was my sweetheart at
the time. She, a Unix system administrator, had pointed out how her
name would fit a common naming pattern for Unix system versions; as a
joke, she told her friends, “Someone should name a kernel after
me.” I said nothing, but decided to surprise her with a kernel
named Alix.
-</p>
-<p>It did not stay that way.
-<a name="index-Bushnell_002c-Michael-_0028now-Thomas_0029"></a>
-Michael (now Thomas) Bushnell, the main
-<a name="index-developers_002c-_0028see-also-programmers_0029-1"></a>
-developer of the kernel, preferred the name Hurd, and redefined Alix
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ It did not stay that way.
+ <a name="index-Bushnell_002c-Michael-_0028now-Thomas_0029">
+ </a>
+ Michael (now Thomas) Bushnell, the main
+ <a name="index-developers_002c-_0028see-also-programmers_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ developer of the kernel, preferred the name Hurd, and redefined Alix
to refer to a certain part of the kernel—the part that would trap
system calls and handle them by sending messages to Hurd servers.
-</p>
-<p>Later, Alix and I broke up, and she changed her name;
-independently, the Hurd design was changed so that the
-<a name="index-C-library-5"></a>
-<a name="index-libraries-_0028comp_002e_0029_002c-C-5"></a>
-C library would
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Later, Alix and I broke up, and she changed her name;
+independently, the Hurd design was changed so that the
+ <a name="index-C-library-5">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-libraries-_0028comp_002e_0029_002c-C-5">
+ </a>
+ C library would
send messages directly to servers, and this made the Alix component
disappear from the design.
-</p>
-<p>But before these things happened, a friend of hers came across the
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ But before these things happened, a friend of hers came across the
name Alix in the Hurd source code, and mentioned it to her. So
she did have the chance to find a kernel named after her.
-</p>
-<a name="Linux-and-GNU_002fLinux"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Linux and GNU/Linux </h3>
-
-<p>The GNU Hurd is not suitable for production use, and we don’t know
+ </p>
+ <a name="Linux-and-GNU_002fLinux">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Linux and GNU/Linux
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ The GNU Hurd is not suitable for production use, and we don’t know
if it ever will be. The capability-based design has problems that
result directly from the flexibility of the design, and it is not
clear solutions exist.
-</p>
-<p>Fortunately, another kernel is available.
-<a name="index-Unix-compatibility_002c-Linux-kernel-and"></a>
-In 1991,
-<a name="index-Torvalds_002c-Linus"></a>
-Linus Torvalds developed a
-<a name="index-Linux-kernel"></a>
-<a name="index-kernel_002c-Linux"></a>
-Unix-compatible kernel and called it Linux. In 1992, he made Linux
-free software; combining Linux with the not-quite-complete
-<a name="index-GNU-_0028see-also-both-software-and-GNU_0029-1"></a>
-GNU system
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Fortunately, another kernel is available.
+ <a name="index-Unix-compatibility_002c-Linux-kernel-and">
+ </a>
+ In 1991,
+ <a name="index-Torvalds_002c-Linus">
+ </a>
+ Linus Torvalds developed a
+ <a name="index-Linux-kernel">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-kernel_002c-Linux">
+ </a>
+ Unix-compatible kernel and called it Linux. In 1992, he made Linux
+free software; combining Linux with the not-quite-complete
+ <a name="index-GNU-_0028see-also-both-software-and-GNU_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ GNU system
resulted in a complete free operating system. (Combining them was a
substantial job in itself, of course.) It is due to Linux that we can
actually run a version of the GNU system today.
-</p>
-<p>We call this system version GNU/Linux, to express its composition as a
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ We call this system version GNU/Linux, to express its composition as a
combination of the GNU system with Linux as the kernel.
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Hurd-1"></a>
-</p>
-<a name="Challenges-in-Our-Future"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Challenges in Our Future </h3>
-
-<a name="index-call-to-action_002c-future-challenges"></a>
-<a name="index-citizen-values_002c-future-challenges-to"></a>
-<p>We have proved our ability to develop a broad spectrum of free
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Hurd-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <a name="Challenges-in-Our-Future">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Challenges in Our Future
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-future-challenges">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-citizen-values_002c-future-challenges-to">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ We have proved our ability to develop a broad spectrum of free
software. This does not mean we are invincible and unstoppable.
Several challenges make the future of free software uncertain; meeting
them will require steadfast effort and endurance, sometimes lasting
for years. It will require the kind of determination that people
display when they value their freedom and will not let anyone take it
away.
-</p>
-<p>The following four sections discuss these challenges.
-</p>
-<a name="Secret-Hardware"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Secret Hardware </h3>
-
-<p>Hardware manufacturers increasingly tend to keep hardware
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The following four sections discuss these challenges.
+ </p>
+ <a name="Secret-Hardware">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Secret Hardware
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ Hardware manufacturers increasingly tend to keep hardware
specifications secret. This makes it difficult to write free drivers
-so that Linux and
-<a name="index-XFree86"></a>
-XFree86 can support new hardware. We have complete
+so that Linux and
+ <a name="index-XFree86">
+ </a>
+ XFree86 can support new hardware. We have complete
free systems today, but we will not have them tomorrow if we cannot
support tomorrow’s computers.
-</p>
-<p>There are two ways to cope with this problem. Programmers can do
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ There are two ways to cope with this problem. Programmers can do
reverse engineering to figure out how to support the hardware. The
rest of us can choose the hardware that is supported by free software;
as our numbers increase, secrecy of specifications will become a
self-defeating policy.
-</p>
-<p>Reverse engineering is a big job; will we have programmers with
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Reverse engineering is a big job; will we have programmers with
sufficient determination to undertake it? Yes—if we have built up a
strong feeling that free software is a matter of principle, and
nonfree drivers are intolerable. And will large numbers of us spend
extra money, or even a little extra time, so we can use free drivers?
Yes, if the determination to have freedom is widespread.
-</p>
-<p>[2008 note: this issue extends to the BIOS as well.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ [2008 note: this issue extends to the BIOS as well.
There is a free BIOS, coreboot; the problem is getting specs
for machines so that coreboot can support them.]
-</p>
-<a name="Nonfree-Libraries"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Nonfree Libraries </h3>
-
-<a name="index-traps_002c-nonfree-libraries"></a>
-<a name="index-developers_002c-traps-for"></a>
-<p>A nonfree library that runs on free operating systems acts as a trap
+ </p>
+ <a name="Nonfree-Libraries">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Nonfree Libraries
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-traps_002c-nonfree-libraries">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-developers_002c-traps-for">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ A nonfree library that runs on free operating systems acts as a trap
for free software developers. The library’s attractive features are
the bait; if you use the library, you fall into the trap, because your
program cannot usefully be part of a free operating system. (Strictly
speaking, we could include your program, but it
-won’t <em>run</em> with the library missing.) Even worse, if
+won’t
+ <em>
+ run
+ </em>
+ with the library missing.) Even worse, if
a program that uses the proprietary library becomes popular, it can
lure other unsuspecting programmers into the trap.
-</p>
-<a name="index-Motif-_0028see-also-LessTif_0029"></a>
-<p>The first instance of this problem was the Motif toolkit, back in the
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-Motif-_0028see-also-LessTif_0029">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The first instance of this problem was the Motif toolkit, back in the
80s. Although there were as yet no free operating systems, it was
clear what problem Motif would cause for them later on. The GNU
Project responded in two ways: by asking individual free software
-projects to support the free
-<a name="index-X-Toolkit"></a>
-X Toolkit widgets as well as Motif, and
+projects to support the free
+ <a name="index-X-Toolkit">
+ </a>
+ X Toolkit widgets as well as Motif, and
by asking for someone to write a free replacement for Motif. The job
-took many years;
-<a name="index-LessTif-_0028see-also-Motif_0029-1"></a>
-LessTif, developed by the
-<a name="index-Hungry-Programmers"></a>
-Hungry Programmers, became
+took many years;
+ <a name="index-LessTif-_0028see-also-Motif_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ LessTif, developed by the
+ <a name="index-Hungry-Programmers">
+ </a>
+ Hungry Programmers, became
powerful enough to support most Motif applications only in 1997.
-</p>
-<a name="index-Qt"></a>
-<a name="index-KDE"></a>
-<p>Between 1996 and 1998, another nonfree GUI toolkit library, called
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-Qt">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-KDE">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Between 1996 and 1998, another nonfree GUI toolkit library, called
Qt, was used in a substantial collection of free software, the desktop
KDE.
-</p>
-<p>Free GNU/Linux systems were unable to use KDE,
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Free GNU/Linux systems were unable to use KDE,
because we could not use the library. However, some commercial
distributors of GNU/Linux systems who were not strict about sticking
with free software added KDE to their
@@ -1055,18 +1424,27 @@ The KDE group was actively encouraging more
programmers to use Qt, and millions of new “Linux users”
had never been exposed to the idea that there was a problem in this.
The situation appeared grim.
-</p>
-<a
name="index-GNU_002c-GNOME-_0028GNU-Network-Object-Model-Environment_0029-1"></a>
-<a name="index-GNOME-_0028GNU-Network-Object-Model-Environment_0029-1"></a>
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-Harmony-1"></a>
-<a name="index-Harmony-1"></a>
-<p>The free software community responded to the problem in two ways:
+ </p>
+ <a
name="index-GNU_002c-GNOME-_0028GNU-Network-Object-Model-Environment_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GNOME-_0028GNU-Network-Object-Model-Environment_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-Harmony-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Harmony-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The free software community responded to the problem in two ways:
GNOME and Harmony.
-</p>
-<a name="index-de-Icaza_002c-Miguel"></a>
-<a name="index-Red-Hat-Software"></a>
-<a name="index-C_002b_002b_002c-language"></a>
-<p>GNOME, the GNU Network Object Model Environment, is
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-de-Icaza_002c-Miguel">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Red-Hat-Software">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-C_002b_002b_002c-language">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ GNOME, the GNU Network Object Model Environment, is
GNU’s desktop project. Started in 1997 by Miguel de Icaza, and
developed with the support of Red Hat
Software, GNOME set out to provide similar desktop
@@ -1074,50 +1452,65 @@ facilities, but using free software exclusively. It has
technical
advantages as well, such as supporting a variety of languages, not
just C++. But its main purpose was freedom: not to require the use of
any nonfree software.
-</p>
-<p>Harmony is a compatible replacement library, designed to make it
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Harmony is a compatible replacement library, designed to make it
possible to run KDE software without using Qt.
-</p>
-<p>In November 1998, the developers of Qt announced a change of license
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ In November 1998, the developers of Qt announced a change of license
which, when carried out, should make Qt free software. There is no
way to be sure, but I think that this was partly due to the
community’s firm response to the problem that Qt posed when it was
nonfree. (The new license is inconvenient and inequitable, so it
remains desirable to avoid using Qt.)
-</p>
-<p>[Subsequent note: in September 2000, Qt was rereleased under the
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ [Subsequent note: in September 2000, Qt was rereleased under the
GNU GPL, which essentially solved this problem.]
-</p>
-<a name="index-citizen-values_002c-convenience-v_002e-1"></a>
-<p>How will we respond to the next tempting nonfree library? Will the
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-citizen-values_002c-convenience-v_002e-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ How will we respond to the next tempting nonfree library? Will the
whole community understand the need to stay out of the trap? Or will
many of us give up freedom for convenience, and produce a major
problem? Our future depends on our philosophy.
-</p>
-<a name="Software-Patents"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Software Patents </h3>
-
-<a
name="index-LZW-_0028Lempel_002dZiv_002dWelch_0029-data-compression-algorithm-_0028see-also-patents_0029-1"></a>
-<a name="index-patents"></a>
-<a name="index-patents_002c-LZW-data-compression-algorithm"></a>
-<p>The worst threat we face comes from software patents, which can put
+ </p>
+ <a name="Software-Patents">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Software Patents
+ </h3>
+ <a
name="index-LZW-_0028Lempel_002dZiv_002dWelch_0029-data-compression-algorithm-_0028see-also-patents_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-patents">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-patents_002c-LZW-data-compression-algorithm">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The worst threat we face comes from software patents, which can put
algorithms and features off limits to free software for up to 20
years. The LZW compression algorithm patents were
applied for in 1983, and we still cannot release free software to
-produce proper compressed
-<a name="index-GIF"></a>
-GIFs. [As of 2009 they have expired.] In 1998, a free program to produce
-<a name="index-MP3"></a>
-MP3 compressed audio was
+produce proper compressed
+ <a name="index-GIF">
+ </a>
+ GIFs. [As of 2009 they have expired.] In 1998, a free program to produce
+ <a name="index-MP3">
+ </a>
+ MP3 compressed audio was
removed from distribution under threat of a patent suit.
-</p>
-<p>There are ways to cope with patents: we can search for evidence that a
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ There are ways to cope with patents: we can search for evidence that a
patent is invalid, and we can look for alternative ways to do a job.
But each of these methods works only sometimes; when both fail, a
patent may force all free software to lack some feature that users
want. What will we do when this happens?
-</p>
-<p>Those of us who value free software for freedom’s sake will stay with
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Those of us who value free software for freedom’s sake will stay with
free software anyway. We will manage to get work done without the
patented features. But those who value free software because they
expect it to be technically superior are likely to call it a failure
@@ -1125,40 +1518,49 @@ when a patent holds it back. Thus, while it is useful
to talk about
the practical effectiveness of the “bazaar” model of
development, and the reliability and power of some free software,
we must not stop there. We must talk about freedom and principle.
-</p>
-<a name="Free-Documentation"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Free Documentation </h3>
-
-<a name="index-documentation-_0028see-also-both-FDL-and-manuals_0029"></a>
-<a name="index-manuals_002c-need-for"></a>
-<p>The biggest deficiency in our free operating systems is not in the
+ </p>
+ <a name="Free-Documentation">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Free Documentation
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-documentation-_0028see-also-both-FDL-and-manuals_0029">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-manuals_002c-need-for">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The biggest deficiency in our free operating systems is not in the
software—it is the lack of good free manuals that we can include in
our systems. Documentation is an essential part of any software
package; when an important free software package does not come with a
good free manual, that is a major gap. We have many such gaps today.
-</p>
-<p>Free documentation, like free software, is a matter of freedom, not
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Free documentation, like free software, is a matter of freedom, not
price. The criterion for a free manual is pretty much the same as for
free software: it is a matter of giving all users certain freedoms.
Redistribution (including commercial sale) must be permitted, online
and on paper, so that the manual can accompany every copy of the
program.
-</p>
-<p>Permission for modification is crucial too. As a general rule, I
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Permission for modification is crucial too. As a general rule, I
don’t believe that it is essential for people to have permission to
modify all sorts of articles and books. For example, I don’t think
you or I are obliged to give permission to modify articles like this
one, which describe our actions and our views.
-</p>
-<p>But there is a particular reason why the freedom to modify is crucial
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ But there is a particular reason why the freedom to modify is crucial
for documentation for free software. When people exercise their right
to modify the software, and add or change its features, if they are
conscientious they will change the manual, too—so they can
provide accurate and usable documentation with the modified program.
A nonfree manual, which does not allow programmers to be conscientious
and finish the job, does not fill our community’s needs.
-</p>
-<p>Some kinds of limits on how modifications are done pose no problem.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Some kinds of limits on how modifications are done pose no problem.
For example, requirements to preserve the original author’s copyright
notice, the distribution terms, or the list of authors, are OK. It is
also no problem to require modified versions to include notice that
@@ -1168,63 +1570,87 @@ topics. These kinds of restrictions are not a problem
because they
don’t stop the conscientious programmer from adapting the manual to
fit the modified program. In other words, they don’t block the free
software community from making full use of the manual.
-</p>
-<p>However, it must be possible to modify all the <em>technical</em> content of
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ However, it must be possible to modify all the
+ <em>
+ technical
+ </em>
+ content of
the manual, and then distribute the result in all the usual media,
through all the usual channels; otherwise, the restrictions do
obstruct the community, the manual is not free, and we need another
manual.
-</p>
-<a name="index-developers_002c-manuals"></a>
-<p>Will free software developers have the awareness and determination to
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-developers_002c-manuals">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Will free software developers have the awareness and determination to
produce a full spectrum of free manuals? Once again, our future
depends on philosophy.
-</p>
-<a name="index-documentation-_0028see-also-both-FDL-and-manuals_0029-1"></a>
-<a name="index-manuals_002c-need-for-1"></a>
-<a name="index-citizen-values_002c-future-challenges-to-1"></a>
-
-<a name="We-Must-Talk-about-Freedom"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> We Must Talk about Freedom </h3>
-
-<a name="index-call-to-action_002c-talk-about-freedom"></a>
-<p>Estimates today are that there are ten million users of GNU/Linux
-systems such as
-<a name="index-Debian-GNU_002fLinux"></a>
-Debian GNU/Linux and
-<a
name="index-Red-Hat-Linux-_0028see-also-_0060_0060Linux_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term_0029"></a>
-Red Hat “Linux.”
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-documentation-_0028see-also-both-FDL-and-manuals_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-manuals_002c-need-for-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-citizen-values_002c-future-challenges-to-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="We-Must-Talk-about-Freedom">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ We Must Talk about Freedom
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-talk-about-freedom">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Estimates today are that there are ten million users of GNU/Linux
+systems such as
+ <a name="index-Debian-GNU_002fLinux">
+ </a>
+ Debian GNU/Linux and
+ <a
name="index-Red-Hat-Linux-_0028see-also-_0060_0060Linux_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term_0029">
+ </a>
+ Red Hat “Linux.”
Free software has developed such practical advantages that users are
flocking to it for purely practical reasons.
-</p>
-<a name="index-commercial-use-and-development-1"></a>
-<p>The good consequences of this are evident: more interest in developing
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-commercial-use-and-development-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The good consequences of this are evident: more interest in developing
free software, more customers for free software businesses, and more
ability to encourage companies to develop commercial free software
instead of proprietary software products.
-</p>
-<p>But interest in the software is growing faster than awareness of the
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ But interest in the software is growing faster than awareness of the
philosophy it is based on, and this leads to trouble. Our ability to
meet the challenges and threats described above depends on the will to
stand firm for freedom. To make sure our community has this will, we
need to spread the idea to the new users as they come into the
community.
-</p>
-<p>But we are failing to do so: the efforts to attract new users into our
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ But we are failing to do so: the efforts to attract new users into our
community are far outstripping the efforts to teach them the civics of
our community. We need to do both, and we need to keep the two
efforts in balance.
-</p>
-<a name="g_t_0060_0060Open-Source_0027_0027"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> “Open Source” </h3>
-
-<a name="index-_0060_0060open-source_002c_0027_0027-values-of"></a>
-<p>Teaching new users about freedom became more difficult in 1998, when a
+ </p>
+ <a name="g_t_0060_0060Open-Source_0027_0027">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ “Open Source”
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-_0060_0060open-source_002c_0027_0027-values-of">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Teaching new users about freedom became more difficult in 1998, when a
part of the community decided to stop using the term “free
software” and say “open source software”
instead.
-</p>
-<p>Some who favored this term aimed to avoid the confusion of
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Some who favored this term aimed to avoid the confusion of
“free” with “gratis”—a valid goal. Others,
however, aimed to set aside the spirit of principle that had motivated
the free software movement and the GNU Project, and to appeal instead
@@ -1233,109 +1659,199 @@ places profit above freedom, above community, above
principle. Thus,
the rhetoric of “open source” focuses on the potential to
make high-quality, powerful software, but shuns the ideas of freedom,
community, and principle.
-</p>
-<a
name="index-_0060_0060Linux_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term-_0028see-also-open-source_0029"></a>
-<p>The “Linux” magazines are a clear example of this—they
+ </p>
+ <a
name="index-_0060_0060Linux_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term-_0028see-also-open-source_0029">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The “Linux” magazines are a clear example of this—they
are filled with advertisements for proprietary software that works
-with GNU/Linux. When the next
-<a name="index-Motif-_0028see-also-LessTif_0029-1"></a>
-Motif or
-<a name="index-Qt-1"></a>
-Qt appears, will these
+with GNU/Linux. When the next
+ <a name="index-Motif-_0028see-also-LessTif_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ Motif or
+ <a name="index-Qt-1">
+ </a>
+ Qt appears, will these
magazines warn programmers to stay away from it, or will they run ads
for it?
-</p>
-<p>The support of business can contribute to the community in many ways;
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The support of business can contribute to the community in many ways;
all else being equal, it is useful. But winning their support by
speaking even less about freedom and principle can be disastrous; it
makes the previous imbalance between outreach and civics education
even worse.
-</p>
-<a name="index-citizen-values_002c-open-source-v_002e-free-software"></a>
-<a
name="index-open-source_002c-essential-difference-between-free-software-and"></a>
-<a
name="index-free-software_002c-essential-difference-between-open-source-and"></a>
-<p>“Free software” and “open source” describe the
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-citizen-values_002c-open-source-v_002e-free-software">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-open-source_002c-essential-difference-between-free-software-and">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-free-software_002c-essential-difference-between-open-source-and">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ “Free software” and “open source” describe the
same category of software, more or less, but say different things
about the software, and about values. The GNU Project continues to
use the term “free software,” to express the idea that
freedom, not just technology, is important.
-<a name="index-_0060_0060open-source_002c_0027_0027-values-of-1"></a>
-</p>
-<a name="Try_0021"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Try! </h3>
-
-<a name="index-Yoda"></a>
-<p>Yoda’s aphorism (“There is no ‘try’”) sounds
+ <a name="index-_0060_0060open-source_002c_0027_0027-values-of-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <a name="Try_0021">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Try!
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-Yoda">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Yoda’s aphorism (“There is no ‘try’”) sounds
neat, but it doesn’t work for me. I have done most of my work while
anxious about whether I could do the job, and unsure that it would be
enough to achieve the goal if I did. But I tried anyway, because
there was no one but me between the enemy and my city. Surprising
myself, I have sometimes succeeded.
-</p>
-<p>Sometimes I failed; some of my cities have fallen. Then I found
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Sometimes I failed; some of my cities have fallen. Then I found
another threatened city, and got ready for another battle. Over time,
I’ve learned to look for threats and put myself between them and my
-city, calling on other
-<a name="index-hackers-4"></a>
-hackers to come and join me.
-</p>
-<p>Nowadays, often I’m not the only one. It is a relief and a joy when I
+city, calling on other
+ <a name="index-hackers-4">
+ </a>
+ hackers to come and join me.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Nowadays, often I’m not the only one. It is a relief and a joy when I
see a regiment of hackers digging in to hold the line, and I realize,
this city may survive—for now. But the dangers are greater each
year, and now Microsoft has explicitly targeted our community. We
can’t take the future of freedom for granted. Don’t take it for
granted! If you want to keep your freedom, you must be prepared to
defend it.
-<a name="index-call-to-action_002c-future-challenges-1"></a>
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Project-1"></a>
-<a name="index-GNU-Project-_0028see-also-GNU_0029-1"></a>
-</p><div class="footnote">
-<hr><h3>Footnotes</h3>
-<h3><a name="FOOT2" href="#DOCF2">(2)</a></h3>
-<p>The use of
-<a
name="index-_0060_0060hacker_002c_0027_0027-actual-meaning-of-term-_0028see-also-_0060_0060cracker_0027_0027_0029"></a>
-“hacker” to mean “security breaker” is a confusion on the part of
+ <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-future-challenges-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Project-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GNU-Project-_0028see-also-GNU_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <div class="footnote">
+ <hr>
+ <h3>
+ Footnotes
+ </h3>
+ <h3>
+ <a href="#DOCF2" name="FOOT2">
+ (2)
+ </a>
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ The use of
+ <a
name="index-_0060_0060hacker_002c_0027_0027-actual-meaning-of-term-_0028see-also-_0060_0060cracker_0027_0027_0029">
+ </a>
+ “hacker” to mean “security breaker” is a confusion on the part of
the mass media. We hackers refuse to recognize that meaning, and
continue using the word to mean someone who loves to program, someone
who enjoys playful cleverness, or the combination of the two. See my
article, “On Hacking,” at
-<a
href="http://stallman.org/articles/on-hacking.html";>http://stallman.org/articles/on-hacking.html</a>.
-</p><h3><a name="FOOT3" href="#DOCF3">(3)</a></h3>
-<p>As an
+ <a href="http://stallman.org/articles/on-hacking.html";>
+ http://stallman.org/articles/on-hacking.html
+ </a>
+ .
+ </p>
+ <h3>
+ <a href="#DOCF3" name="FOOT3">
+ (3)
+ </a>
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ As an
Atheist, I don’t follow any religious leaders, but I sometimes find I
admire something one of them has said.
-</p><h3><a name="FOOT4" href="#DOCF4">(4)</a></h3>
-<p>In 1984 or 1985,
-<a name="index-Hopkins_002c-Don"></a>
-Don Hopkins (a very
+ </p>
+ <h3>
+ <a href="#DOCF4" name="FOOT4">
+ (4)
+ </a>
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ In 1984 or 1985,
+ <a name="index-Hopkins_002c-Don">
+ </a>
+ Don Hopkins (a very
imaginative fellow) mailed me a letter. On the envelope he had written
several amusing sayings, including this one: “Copyleft—all rights
reversed.” I used the word “copyleft” to name the distribution
concept I was developing at the time.
-</p><h3><a name="FOOT5" href="#DOCF5">(5)</a></h3>
-<p>We now use the
-<a name="index-FDL-_0028see-also-both-manuals-and-documentation_0029"></a>
-GNU Free
+ </p>
+ <h3>
+ <a href="#DOCF5" name="FOOT5">
+ (5)
+ </a>
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ We now use the
+ <a name="index-FDL-_0028see-also-both-manuals-and-documentation_0029">
+ </a>
+ GNU Free
Documentation License (address@hidden
-</p><h3><a name="FOOT6" href="#DOCF6">(6)</a></h3>
-<p>“Bourne Again Shell” is a play on the name “Bourne
+ </p>
+ <h3>
+ <a href="#DOCF6" name="FOOT6">
+ (6)
+ </a>
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ “Bourne Again Shell” is a play on the name “Bourne
Shell,” which was the usual shell on Unix.
-</p><h3><a name="FOOT7" href="#DOCF7">(7)</a></h3>
-<p>That was written in 1998. In 2009 we no longer maintain a long
+ </p>
+ <h3>
+ <a href="#DOCF7" name="FOOT7">
+ (7)
+ </a>
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ That was written in 1998. In 2009 we no longer maintain a long
task list. The community develops free software so fast that we can’t
even keep track of it all. Instead, we have a list of High Priority
Projects, a much shorter list of projects we really want to encourage
people to write.
-</p><h3><a name="FOOT8" href="#DOCF8">(8)</a></h3>
-<p>This license is now called
+ </p>
+ <h3>
+ <a href="#DOCF8" name="FOOT8">
+ (8)
+ </a>
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ This license is now called
the GNU Lesser General Public License, to avoid giving the idea that
all libraries ought to use it.
-</p><h3><a name="FOOT9" href="#DOCF9">(9)</a></h3>
-<p>Eric Raymond is a prominent open source advocate; see “Why Open
+ </p>
+ <h3>
+ <a href="#DOCF9" name="FOOT9">
+ (9)
+ </a>
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ Eric Raymond is a prominent open source advocate; see “Why Open
Source Misses the Point” (address@hidden Misses Point-pg}{
-</p><h3><a name="FOOT10" href="#DOCF10">(10)</a></h3>
-<p>Eric S. Raymond, <cite>The Cathedral and the Bazaar: Musings on Linux and
-Open Source by an Accidental Revolutionary,</cite> rev. ed. (Sebastopol,
+ </p>
+ <h3>
+ <a href="#DOCF10" name="FOOT10">
+ (10)
+ </a>
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ Eric S. Raymond,
+ <cite>
+ The Cathedral and the Bazaar: Musings on Linux and
+Open Source by an Accidental Revolutionary,
+ </cite>
+ rev. ed. (Sebastopol,
Calif.: O’Reilly, 2001), p. 23.
-</p></div>
-<hr size="2"></section></body></html>
+ </p>
+ </hr>
+ </div>
+ <hr size="2"/>
+</section>
diff --git a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_20.html
b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_20.html
index 54b75e8..9815d84 100644
--- a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_20.html
+++ b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_20.html
@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
-<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/loose.dtd";>
-<html><!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
+<!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
Free Software Foundation
@@ -19,42 +18,24 @@ ISBN 978-0-9831592-0-9
Cover design by Rob Myers.
Cover photograph by Peter Hinely.
- --><!-- Created on February 18, 2016 by texi2html 1.82
-texi2html was written by:
- Lionel Cons <address@hidden> (original author)
- Karl Berry <address@hidden>
- Olaf Bachmann <address@hidden>
- and many others.
-Maintained by: Many creative people.
-Send bugs and suggestions to <address@hidden>
---><head><title>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 20. Freedom—or
Copyright</title><meta name="description" content="This is the second edition
of Richard Stallman's collection of essays."><meta name="keywords"
content="Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 20. Freedom—or Copyright"><meta
name="resource-type" content="document"><meta name="distribution"
content="global"><meta name="Generator" content="texi2html 1.82"><meta
http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">< [...]
-<!--
-a.summary-letter {text-decoration: none}
-blockquote.smallquotation {font-size: smaller}
-pre.display {font-family: serif}
-pre.format {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-comment {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-preformatted {font-family: serif}
-pre.smalldisplay {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallexample {font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallformat {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smalllisp {font-size: smaller}
-span.roman {font-family:serif; font-weight:normal;}
-span.sansserif {font-family:sans-serif; font-weight:normal;}
-ul.toc {list-style: none}
--->
-</style><link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
href="../static/web-common/style.css"></head><body lang="en" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
text="#000000" link="#0000FF" vlink="#800080" alink="#FF0000" class="article">
+ -->
-<a name="Freedom-or-Copyright"></a>
-<header><div id="logo"><a href="/"><img src="../static/gnu.svg" height="100"
width="100"></a></div><h1 class="book-title">Free Software, Free Society, 2nd
ed.</h1></header><section id="main"><a
name="Freedom_002d_002d_002dor-Copyright"></a>
-<h1 class="chapter"> 20. Freedom—or Copyright </h1>
-
-
-<blockquote class="smallquotation"><p>This essay addresses how the principles
of software freedom apply in
+<section id="main">
+ <a name="Freedom_002d_002d_002dor-Copyright">
+ </a>
+ <h1 class="chapter">
+ 20. Freedom—or Copyright
+ </h1>
+ <blockquote class="smallquotation">
+ <p>
+ This essay addresses how the principles of software freedom apply in
some cases to other works of authorship and art. It’s included here
since it involves the application of the ideas of free software.
-</p></blockquote>
-<br><p>Copyright was established in the age of the printing press as an
+ </p>
+ </blockquote>
+ <br>
+ <p>
+ Copyright was established in the age of the printing press as an
industrial regulation on the business of writing and publishing. The
aim was to encourage the publication of a diversity of written works.
The means was to require publishers to get the author’s permission to
@@ -64,22 +45,26 @@ reading public received the benefit of this, while losing
little:
copyright restricted only publication, not the things an ordinary
reader could do. That made copyright arguably a beneficial system for
the public, and therefore arguably legitimate.
-</p>
-<p>Well and good—back then.
-</p>
-<p>Now we have a new way of distributing information: computers and
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Well and good—back then.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Now we have a new way of distributing information: computers and
networks. Their benefit is that they facilitate copying and
manipulating information, including software, musical recordings,
books, and movies. They offer the possibility of unlimited access to
all sorts of data—an information utopia.
-</p>
-<p>One obstacle stood in the way: copyright. Readers and listeners who
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ One obstacle stood in the way: copyright. Readers and listeners who
made use of their new ability to copy and share published information
were technically copyright infringers. The same law which had
formerly acted as a beneficial industrial regulation on publishers had
become a restriction on the public it was meant to serve.
-</p>
-<p>In a democracy, a law that prohibits a popular and useful activity is
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ In a democracy, a law that prohibits a popular and useful activity is
usually soon relaxed. Not so where corporations have political power.
The publishers’ lobby was determined to prevent the public from taking
advantage of the power of their computers, and found copyright a
@@ -89,126 +74,175 @@ ever, imposing harsh penalties on the practice of
sharing. The latest
fashion in supporting the publishers against the citizens, known as
“three strikes,” is to cut off people’s Internet connections if
they share.
-</p>
-<p>But that wasn’t the worst of it. Computers can be powerful tools of
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ But that wasn’t the worst of it. Computers can be powerful tools of
domination when software suppliers deny users the control of the
software they run. The
publishers realized that by publishing works in encrypted format,
which only specially authorized software could view, they could gain
unprecedented power: they could compel readers to pay, and identify
themselves, every time they read a book, listen to a song, or watch a
-video. That is the publishers’ dream: a
-<a name="index-pay_002dper_002dview"></a>
-pay-per-view universe.
-</p>
-<a name="index-DMCA_002c-publishers-and-1"></a>
-<p>The publishers gained US government support for their dream with the
+video. That is the publishers’ dream: a
+ <a name="index-pay_002dper_002dview">
+ </a>
+ pay-per-view universe.
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-DMCA_002c-publishers-and-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The publishers gained US government support for their dream with the
Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998. This law gave publishers
power to write their own copyright rules, by implementing them in the
code of the authorized player software. Under this practice, called
-Digital Restrictions Management, or
-<a
name="index-DRM_002c-call-it-_0060_0060Digital-Restrictions-Management_0027_0027-1"></a>
-DRM, even reading or listening
+Digital Restrictions Management, or
+ <a
name="index-DRM_002c-call-it-_0060_0060Digital-Restrictions-Management_0027_0027-1">
+ </a>
+ DRM, even reading or listening
without authorization is forbidden.
-</p>
-<a name="index-e_002dbooks-2"></a>
-<p>We still have the same old freedoms in using paper books and other
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-e_002dbooks-2">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ We still have the same old freedoms in using paper books and other
analog media. But if e-books replace printed books, those freedoms
will not transfer. Imagine: no more used book stores; no more lending
a book to your friend; no more borrowing one from the public
-<a name="index-libraries_002c-e_002dbooks-and-1"></a>
-library—no more “leaks” that might give someone a
+ <a name="index-libraries_002c-e_002dbooks-and-1">
+ </a>
+ library—no more “leaks” that might give someone a
chance to read without paying. No more purchasing a book anonymously with
cash—you can only buy an e-book with a credit card. That is
-the world the publishers want to impose on us. If you buy the
-<a name="index-Amazon"></a>
-Amazon
-<a name="index-Kindle-_0028see-also-Swindle_0029"></a>
-Kindle (we call it the
-<a name="index-Swindle"></a>
-Swindle) or the
-<a name="index-Sony-Reader-_0028call-it-the-Shreader_0029"></a>
-Sony Reader (we
+the world the publishers want to impose on us. If you buy the
+ <a name="index-Amazon">
+ </a>
+ Amazon
+ <a name="index-Kindle-_0028see-also-Swindle_0029">
+ </a>
+ Kindle (we call it the
+ <a name="index-Swindle">
+ </a>
+ Swindle) or the
+ <a name="index-Sony-Reader-_0028call-it-the-Shreader_0029">
+ </a>
+ Sony Reader (we
call it the Shreader for what it threatens to do to books), you pay to
establish that world.
-</p>
-<p>The
-<a name="index-Swindle-1"></a>
-Swindle even has an Orwellian back door that can be used to erase
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The
+ <a name="index-Swindle-1">
+ </a>
+ Swindle even has an Orwellian back door that can be used to erase
books remotely. Amazon demonstrated this capability by erasing
-copies, purchased from Amazon, of
-<a name="index-Orwell_002c-George"></a>
-Orwell’s book
-<a name="index-1984_002c-George-Orwell"></a>
-<cite>1984.</cite> Evidently
+copies, purchased from Amazon, of
+ <a name="index-Orwell_002c-George">
+ </a>
+ Orwell’s book
+ <a name="index-1984_002c-George-Orwell">
+ </a>
+ <cite>
+ 1984.
+ </cite>
+ Evidently
Amazon’s name for this product reflects the intention to burn our
books.
-</p>
-<p>Public anger against DRM is slowly growing, held back because
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Public anger against DRM is slowly growing, held back because
propaganda expressions such
-as
-<a
name="index-_0060_0060protection_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term-1"></a>
-“protect
+as
+ <a name="index-_0060_0060protection_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term-1">
+ </a>
+ “protect
authors”
-and
-<a
name="index-_0060_0060intellectual-property_002c_0027_0027-bias-and-fallacy-of-term-_0028see-also-ownership_0029-7"></a>
-“intellectual
+and
+ <a
name="index-_0060_0060intellectual-property_002c_0027_0027-bias-and-fallacy-of-term-_0028see-also-ownership_0029-7">
+ </a>
+ “intellectual
property” have convinced readers that their rights do not
count. These terms implicitly assume that publishers deserve special
power in the name of the authors, that we are morally obliged to bow
to them, and that we have wronged someone if we see or hear
anything without paying for permission.
-</p>
-<p>The organizations that profit most from copyright legally exercise it
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The organizations that profit most from copyright legally exercise it
in the name of the authors (most of whom gain little). They would
have you believe that copyright is a natural right of authors, and
that we the public must suffer it no matter how painful it is. They
-call sharing
-<a name="index-_0060_0060piracy_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term-7"></a>
-“piracy,” equating helping your neighbor with
+call sharing
+ <a name="index-_0060_0060piracy_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term-7">
+ </a>
+ “piracy,” equating helping your neighbor with
attacking a ship.
-</p>
-<a name="index-War-on-Sharing-_0028see-also-DRM-and-copyright_0029"></a>
-<p>They also tell us that a War on Sharing is the only way to keep
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-War-on-Sharing-_0028see-also-DRM-and-copyright_0029">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ They also tell us that a War on Sharing is the only way to keep
art alive. Even if true, it would not justify the policy; but it
isn’t true. Public sharing of copies is likely to increase the sales of
most works, and decrease sales only for big hits.
-</p>
-<a name="index-e_002dbooks-3"></a>
-<p>Bestsellers can still do well without forbidding sharing.
-<a name="index-King_002c-Stephen"></a>
-Stephen
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-e_002dbooks-3">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Bestsellers can still do well without forbidding sharing.
+ <a name="index-King_002c-Stephen">
+ </a>
+ Stephen
King got hundreds of thousands of dollars selling an unencrypted
e-book serial with no obstacle to copying and sharing. (He was
dissatisfied with that amount and called the experiment a failure, but it looks
-like a success to me.)
-<a name="index-Radiohead"></a>
-Radiohead made millions in 2007 by inviting
+like a success to me.)
+ <a name="index-Radiohead">
+ </a>
+ Radiohead made millions in 2007 by inviting
fans to copy an album and pay what they wished, while it was also
-shared through
-<a name="index-peer_002dto_002dpeer"></a>
-peer-to-peer. In
-2008,
-<a name="index-Nine-Inch-Nails"></a>
-Nine Inch Nails released an album with permission to share copies and
-made $750,000 in a few days.<a name="DOCF43" href="#FOOT43">(43)</a>
-</p>
-<p>The possibility of success without oppression is not limited to
+shared through
+ <a name="index-peer_002dto_002dpeer">
+ </a>
+ peer-to-peer. In
+2008,
+ <a name="index-Nine-Inch-Nails">
+ </a>
+ Nine Inch Nails released an album with permission to share copies and
+made $750,000 in a few days.
+ <a href="#FOOT43" name="DOCF43">
+ (43)
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The possibility of success without oppression is not limited to
bestsellers. Many artists of various levels of fame now make an
-adequate living through voluntary support:<a name="DOCF44"
href="#FOOT44">(44)</a>
-donations and merchandise purchases of their fans.
-<a name="index-Kelly_002c-Kevin"></a>
-Kevin Kelly<a name="DOCF45" href="#FOOT45">(45)</a> estimates the artist need
-only find around 1,000 true fans.<a name="DOCF46" href="#FOOT46">(46)</a>
-</p>
-<p>When computer networks provide an easy anonymous method for sending
+adequate living through voluntary support:
+ <a href="#FOOT44" name="DOCF44">
+ (44)
+ </a>
+ donations and merchandise purchases of their fans.
+ <a name="index-Kelly_002c-Kevin">
+ </a>
+ Kevin Kelly
+ <a href="#FOOT45" name="DOCF45">
+ (45)
+ </a>
+ estimates the artist need
+only find around 1,000 true fans.
+ <a href="#FOOT46" name="DOCF46">
+ (46)
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ When computer networks provide an easy anonymous method for sending
someone a small amount of money, without a credit card, it will be
easy to set up a much better system to support the arts. When you
view a work, there will be a button you can press saying, “Click
here to send the artist one dollar.” Wouldn’t you press it, at
least once a week?
-</p>
-<p>Another good way to support music and the arts is with
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Another good way to support music and the arts is with
tax funds—perhaps a tax on blank media
or on Internet connectivity. The state should
distribute the tax money entirely to the artists, not
@@ -223,48 +257,125 @@ B. Thus, each superstar gets a larger share than a less
popular
artist, but most of the funds go to the artists who really need this
support. This system will use our tax money efficiently to support
the arts.
-</p>
-<a name="index-Global-Patronage-_0028see-also-DRM-and-copyright_0029"></a>
-<p>The Global Patronage<a name="DOCF47" href="#FOOT47">(47)</a> proposal
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-Global-Patronage-_0028see-also-DRM-and-copyright_0029">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The Global Patronage
+ <a href="#FOOT47" name="DOCF47">
+ (47)
+ </a>
+ proposal
combines aspects of those two systems, incorporating mandatory
payments with voluntary allocation among artists.
-</p>
-<a name="index-Spain-1"></a>
-<p>In Spain, this tax system should replace the
-<a name="index-SGAE"></a>
-SGAE<a name="DOCF48" href="#FOOT48">(48)</a> and its canon,
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-Spain-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ In Spain, this tax system should replace the
+ <a name="index-SGAE">
+ </a>
+ SGAE
+ <a href="#FOOT48" name="DOCF48">
+ (48)
+ </a>
+ and its canon,
which could be eliminated.
-</p>
-<a name="index-call-to-action_002c-boycott-products-with-DRM"></a>
-<a
name="index-call-to-action_002c-legalize-noncommercial-copying-and-sharing-of-all-published-works"></a>
-<p>To make copyright fit the network age, we should legalize the
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-boycott-products-with-DRM">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-call-to-action_002c-legalize-noncommercial-copying-and-sharing-of-all-published-works">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ To make copyright fit the network age, we should legalize the
noncommercial copying and sharing of all published works, and prohibit
DRM. But until we win this battle, you must protect yourself: don’t
buy any products with DRM unless you personally have the means to
break the DRM. Never use a product designed to attack your freedom
unless you can nullify the attack.
-<a
name="index-DRM_002c-call-it-_0060_0060Digital-Restrictions-Management_0027_0027-2"></a>
-</p><div class="footnote">
-<hr><h3>Footnotes</h3>
-<h3><a name="FOOT43" href="#DOCF43">(43)</a></h3>
-<p>“Nine Inch Nails Made at Least $750k from CC Release in Two Days,” posted
by Cory Doctorow, 5 March 2008,
-<a
href="http://boingboing.net/2008/03/05/nine-inch-nails-made.html";>http://boingboing.net/2008/03/05/nine-inch-nails-made.html</a>.
-</p><h3><a name="FOOT44" href="#DOCF44">(44)</a></h3>
-<p>Mike Masnick,
+ <a
name="index-DRM_002c-call-it-_0060_0060Digital-Restrictions-Management_0027_0027-2">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <div class="footnote">
+ <hr>
+ <h3>
+ Footnotes
+ </h3>
+ <h3>
+ <a href="#DOCF43" name="FOOT43">
+ (43)
+ </a>
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ “Nine Inch Nails Made at Least $750k from CC Release in Two Days,” posted
by Cory Doctorow, 5 March 2008,
+ <a href="http://boingboing.net/2008/03/05/nine-inch-nails-made.html";>
+ http://boingboing.net/2008/03/05/nine-inch-nails-made.html
+ </a>
+ .
+ </p>
+ <h3>
+ <a href="#DOCF44" name="FOOT44">
+ (44)
+ </a>
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ Mike Masnick,
“The Future of Music Business Models (and Those Who Are Already
There),” 25 January 2010,
-<a
href="http://techdirt.com/articles/20091119/1634117011.shtml";>http://techdirt.com/articles/20091119/1634117011.shtml</a>.
-</p><h3><a name="FOOT45" href="#DOCF45">(45)</a></h3>
-<p>Kevin Kelly is a commentator on digital culture
-and the founder of <cite>Wired</cite> magazine.
-</p><h3><a name="FOOT46" href="#DOCF46">(46)</a></h3>
-<p>Kevin Kelly, “1,000 True
+ <a href="http://techdirt.com/articles/20091119/1634117011.shtml";>
+ http://techdirt.com/articles/20091119/1634117011.shtml
+ </a>
+ .
+ </p>
+ <h3>
+ <a href="#DOCF45" name="FOOT45">
+ (45)
+ </a>
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ Kevin Kelly is a commentator on digital culture
+and the founder of
+ <cite>
+ Wired
+ </cite>
+ magazine.
+ </p>
+ <h3>
+ <a href="#DOCF46" name="FOOT46">
+ (46)
+ </a>
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ Kevin Kelly, “1,000 True
Fans,” 4 March 2008,
-<a
href="http://kk.org/thetechnium/archives/2008/03/1000_true_fans.php";>http://kk.org/thetechnium/archives/2008/03/1000_true_fans.php</a>.
-</p><h3><a name="FOOT47" href="#DOCF47">(47)</a></h3>
-<p>See <a href="http://mecenatglobal.org/";>http://mecenatglobal.org/</a> for
more information.
-</p><h3><a name="FOOT48" href="#DOCF48">(48)</a></h3>
-<p>The SGAE is Spain’s main copyright collective for composers, authors,
+ <a href="http://kk.org/thetechnium/archives/2008/03/1000_true_fans.php";>
+ http://kk.org/thetechnium/archives/2008/03/1000_true_fans.php
+ </a>
+ .
+ </p>
+ <h3>
+ <a href="#DOCF47" name="FOOT47">
+ (47)
+ </a>
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ See
+ <a href="http://mecenatglobal.org/";>
+ http://mecenatglobal.org/
+ </a>
+ for more information.
+ </p>
+ <h3>
+ <a href="#DOCF48" name="FOOT48">
+ (48)
+ </a>
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ The SGAE is Spain’s main copyright collective for composers, authors,
and publishers.
-</p></div>
-<hr size="2"></section></body></html>
+ </p>
+ </hr>
+ </div>
+ <hr size="2"/>
+ </br>
+</section>
diff --git a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_21.html
b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_21.html
index 820963b..437cd83 100644
--- a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_21.html
+++ b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_21.html
@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
-<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/loose.dtd";>
-<html><!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
+<!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
Free Software Foundation
@@ -19,45 +18,29 @@ ISBN 978-0-9831592-0-9
Cover design by Rob Myers.
Cover photograph by Peter Hinely.
- --><!-- Created on February 18, 2016 by texi2html 1.82
-texi2html was written by:
- Lionel Cons <address@hidden> (original author)
- Karl Berry <address@hidden>
- Olaf Bachmann <address@hidden>
- and many others.
-Maintained by: Many creative people.
-Send bugs and suggestions to <address@hidden>
---><head><title>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 21. What Is
Copyleft?</title><meta name="description" content="This is the second edition
of Richard Stallman's collection of essays."><meta name="keywords"
content="Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 21. What Is Copyleft?"><meta
name="resource-type" content="document"><meta name="distribution"
content="global"><meta name="Generator" content="texi2html 1.82"><meta
http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><style [...]
-<!--
-a.summary-letter {text-decoration: none}
-blockquote.smallquotation {font-size: smaller}
-pre.display {font-family: serif}
-pre.format {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-comment {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-preformatted {font-family: serif}
-pre.smalldisplay {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallexample {font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallformat {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smalllisp {font-size: smaller}
-span.roman {font-family:serif; font-weight:normal;}
-span.sansserif {font-family:sans-serif; font-weight:normal;}
-ul.toc {list-style: none}
--->
-</style><link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
href="../static/web-common/style.css"></head><body lang="en" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
text="#000000" link="#0000FF" vlink="#800080" alink="#FF0000" class="article">
+ -->
-<a name="Copyleft"></a>
-<header><div id="logo"><a href="/"><img src="../static/gnu.svg" height="100"
width="100"></a></div><h1 class="book-title">Free Software, Free Society, 2nd
ed.</h1></header><section id="main"><a name="What-Is-Copyleft_003f"></a>
-<h1 class="chapter"> 21. What Is Copyleft? </h1>
-
-<a name="index-GPL-2"></a>
-<a name="index-copyleft-_0028see-also-copyright_0029-3"></a>
-<a name="index-copylefted-software-_0028see-also-software_0029-1"></a>
-<p>Copyleft is a general method for making a program (or
+<section id="main">
+ <a name="What-Is-Copyleft_003f">
+ </a>
+ <h1 class="chapter">
+ 21. What Is Copyleft?
+ </h1>
+ <a name="index-GPL-2">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-copyleft-_0028see-also-copyright_0029-3">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-copylefted-software-_0028see-also-software_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Copyleft is a general method for making a program (or
other work) free, and requiring all modified and extended versions of the
program to be free as well.
-</p>
-<a name="index-public-domain-software-_0028see-also-software_0029-4"></a>
-<p>The simplest way to make a program free software is to put it in the
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-public-domain-software-_0028see-also-software_0029-4">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The simplest way to make a program free software is to put it in the
public domain, uncopyrighted. This allows people to
share the program and their improvements, if they are so minded. But
it also allows uncooperative people to convert the program into
@@ -65,89 +48,130 @@ proprietary software. They can make changes, many or few,
and distribute the result as a proprietary product. People who
receive the program in that modified form do not have the freedom that
the original author gave them; the middleman has stripped it away.
-</p>
-<p>In the GNU Project, our aim is
-to give <em>all</em> users the freedom to redistribute and change GNU
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ In the GNU Project, our aim is
+to give
+ <em>
+ all
+ </em>
+ users the freedom to redistribute and change GNU
software. If middlemen could strip off the freedom, we might have
many users, but those users would not have freedom. So instead of
putting GNU software in the public domain, we “copyleft”
it. Copyleft says that anyone who redistributes the software, with or
without changes, must pass along the freedom to further copy and
change it. Copyleft guarantees that every user has freedom.
-</p>
-<p>Copyleft also provides an incentive for other programmers to add to
-free software. Important free programs such as the
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-C_002b_002b-compiler"></a>
-GNU C++ compiler
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Copyleft also provides an incentive for other programmers to add to
+free software. Important free programs such as the
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-C_002b_002b-compiler">
+ </a>
+ GNU C++ compiler
exist only because of this.
-</p>
-<p>Copyleft also helps programmers who want to contribute improvements to
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Copyleft also helps programmers who want to contribute improvements to
free software get permission to
do so. These programmers often work for companies or universities
that would do almost anything to get more money. A programmer may
want to contribute her changes to the community, but her employer may
want to turn the changes into a proprietary software product.
-</p>
-<p>When we explain to the employer that it is illegal to distribute the
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ When we explain to the employer that it is illegal to distribute the
improved version except as free software, the employer usually decides
to release it as free software rather than throw it away.
-</p>
-<p>To copyleft a program, we first state that it is copyrighted; then we
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ To copyleft a program, we first state that it is copyrighted; then we
add distribution terms, which are a legal instrument that gives
everyone the rights to use, modify, and redistribute the program’s
-code, <em>or any program derived from it,</em> but only if the
+code,
+ <em>
+ or any program derived from it,
+ </em>
+ but only if the
distribution terms are unchanged. Thus, the code and the freedoms
become legally inseparable.
-</p>
-<p>Proprietary software developers use copyright to take away the users’
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Proprietary software developers use copyright to take away the users’
freedom; we use copyright to guarantee their freedom. That’s why we
reverse the name, changing “copyright” into
“copyleft.”
-</p>
-<p>Copyleft is a way of using of the copyright on the program. It
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Copyleft is a way of using of the copyright on the program. It
doesn’t mean abandoning the copyright; in fact, doing so would make
copyleft impossible. The “left” in
“copyleft” is not a reference to the verb “to
leave”—only to the direction which is the inverse of
“right.”
-</p>
-<p>Copyleft is a general concept, and you can’t use a general concept
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Copyleft is a general concept, and you can’t use a general concept
directly; you can only use a specific implementation of the concept.
In the GNU Project, the specific distribution terms that we use for
most software are contained in the GNU General Public License. The GNU General
Public License is often called the GNU GPL for
short. There is also a Frequently Asked Questions page about the GNU
-GPL, at <a
href="http://gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html";>http://gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html</a>.
You can also
+GPL, at
+ <a href="http://gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html";>
+ http://gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html
+ </a>
+ . You can also
read about why the FSF gets copyright assignments from contributors,
-at <a
href="http://gnu.org/copyleft/why-assign.html";>http://gnu.org/copyleft/why-assign.html</a>.
-</p>
-<a name="index-libraries-_0028comp_002e_0029_002c-LGPL-and"></a>
-<a name="index-LGPL_002c-and-GNU-libraries"></a>
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-libraries"></a>
-<a name="index-libraries-_0028comp_002e_0029_002c-GNU-1"></a>
-<p>An alternate form of copyleft, the GNU Lesser General Public License
+at
+ <a href="http://gnu.org/copyleft/why-assign.html";>
+ http://gnu.org/copyleft/why-assign.html
+ </a>
+ .
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-libraries-_0028comp_002e_0029_002c-LGPL-and">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-LGPL_002c-and-GNU-libraries">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-libraries">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-libraries-_0028comp_002e_0029_002c-GNU-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ An alternate form of copyleft, the GNU Lesser General Public License
(LGPL), applies to a few (but not all) GNU libraries. To
learn more about properly using the LGPL, please read the article
“Why You Shouldn’t Use the Lesser GPL for Your Next Library,”
-available at <a
href="http://gnu.org/philosophy/why-not-lgpl.html";>http://gnu.org/philosophy/why-not-lgpl.html</a>.
-</p>
-<a name="index-manuals_002c-FDL-and"></a>
-<a name="index-FDL-_0028see-also-both-manuals-and-documentation_0029-1"></a>
-<p>The GNU Free Documentation License (FDL) is a form of
+available at
+ <a href="http://gnu.org/philosophy/why-not-lgpl.html";>
+ http://gnu.org/philosophy/why-not-lgpl.html
+ </a>
+ .
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-manuals_002c-FDL-and">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-FDL-_0028see-also-both-manuals-and-documentation_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The GNU Free Documentation License (FDL) is a form of
copyleft intended for use on a manual, textbook or other document to
assure everyone the effective freedom to copy and redistribute it,
with or without modifications, either commercially or noncommercially.
-</p>
-<p>The appropriate license is included in many manuals and in each GNU
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The appropriate license is included in many manuals and in each GNU
source code distribution.
-</p>
-<p>All these licenses are designed so that you can easily apply them to
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ All these licenses are designed so that you can easily apply them to
your own works, assuming you are the copyright holder. You don’t have
to modify the license to do this, just include a copy of the license
in the work, and add notices in the source files that refer properly
to the license.
-</p>
-<a name="index-LGPL_002c-altering-distribution-terms-to-GPL"></a>
-<p>Using the same distribution terms for many different programs makes it
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-LGPL_002c-altering-distribution-terms-to-GPL">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Using the same distribution terms for many different programs makes it
easy to copy code between various different programs. When they all
have the same distribution terms, there is no problem. The Lesser
GPL, version 2, includes a provision that lets you alter the
@@ -155,20 +179,33 @@ distribution terms to the ordinary GPL, so that you can
copy code into
another program covered by the GPL. Version 3 of the Lesser GPL is
built as an exception added to GPL version 3, making the compatibility
automatic.
-</p>
-<p>If you would like to copyleft your program with the GNU GPL or the GNU
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ If you would like to copyleft your program with the GNU GPL or the GNU
LGPL, please see the license instructions page, at
-<a
href="http://gnu.org/copyleft/gpl-howto.html";>http://gnu.org/copyleft/gpl-howto.html</a>,
for advice.
+ <a href="http://gnu.org/copyleft/gpl-howto.html";>
+ http://gnu.org/copyleft/gpl-howto.html
+ </a>
+ , for advice.
Please note that you must use the entire text of the license you
choose. Each is an integral whole, and partial copies are not
permitted.
-</p>
-<p>If you would like to copyleft your manual with the GNU FDL, please see
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ If you would like to copyleft your manual with the GNU FDL, please see
the instructions at the end of the FDL text, and the GFDL
instructions page, at
-<a
href="http://gnu.org/copyleft/fdl-howto.html";>http://gnu.org/copyleft/fdl-howto.html</a>.
Again, partial
+ <a href="http://gnu.org/copyleft/fdl-howto.html";>
+ http://gnu.org/copyleft/fdl-howto.html
+ </a>
+ . Again, partial
copies are not permitted.
-<a name="index-copylefted-software-_0028see-also-software_0029-2"></a>
-<a name="index-copyleft-_0028see-also-copyright_0029-4"></a>
-<a name="index-GPL-3"></a>
-</p><hr size="2"></section></body></html>
+ <a name="index-copylefted-software-_0028see-also-software_0029-2">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-copyleft-_0028see-also-copyright_0029-4">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GPL-3">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <hr size="2"/>
+</section>
diff --git a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_22.html
b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_22.html
index 40c6a49..bc08a88 100644
--- a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_22.html
+++ b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_22.html
@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
-<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/loose.dtd";>
-<html><!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
+<!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
Free Software Foundation
@@ -19,50 +18,32 @@ ISBN 978-0-9831592-0-9
Cover design by Rob Myers.
Cover photograph by Peter Hinely.
- --><!-- Created on February 18, 2016 by texi2html 1.82
-texi2html was written by:
- Lionel Cons <address@hidden> (original author)
- Karl Berry <address@hidden>
- Olaf Bachmann <address@hidden>
- and many others.
-Maintained by: Many creative people.
-Send bugs and suggestions to <address@hidden>
---><head><title>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 22. Copyleft: Pragmatic
Idealism</title><meta name="description" content="This is the second edition of
Richard Stallman's collection of essays."><meta name="keywords" content="Free
Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 22. Copyleft: Pragmatic Idealism"><meta
name="resource-type" content="document"><meta name="distribution"
content="global"><meta name="Generator" content="texi2html 1.82"><meta
http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; [...]
-<!--
-a.summary-letter {text-decoration: none}
-blockquote.smallquotation {font-size: smaller}
-pre.display {font-family: serif}
-pre.format {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-comment {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-preformatted {font-family: serif}
-pre.smalldisplay {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallexample {font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallformat {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smalllisp {font-size: smaller}
-span.roman {font-family:serif; font-weight:normal;}
-span.sansserif {font-family:sans-serif; font-weight:normal;}
-ul.toc {list-style: none}
--->
-</style><link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
href="../static/web-common/style.css"></head><body lang="en" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
text="#000000" link="#0000FF" vlink="#800080" alink="#FF0000" class="article">
+ -->
-<a name="Pragmatic"></a>
-<header><div id="logo"><a href="/"><img src="../static/gnu.svg" height="100"
width="100"></a></div><h1 class="book-title">Free Software, Free Society, 2nd
ed.</h1></header><section id="main"><a
name="Copyleft_003a-Pragmatic-Idealism"></a>
-<h1 class="chapter"> 22. Copyleft: Pragmatic Idealism </h1>
-
-<a name="index-copyleft-_0028see-also-copyright_0029-5"></a>
-<p>Every decision a person makes stems from the person’s values and
+<section id="main">
+ <a name="Copyleft_003a-Pragmatic-Idealism">
+ </a>
+ <h1 class="chapter">
+ 22. Copyleft: Pragmatic Idealism
+ </h1>
+ <a name="index-copyleft-_0028see-also-copyright_0029-5">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Every decision a person makes stems from the person’s values and
goals. People can have many different goals and values; fame, profit,
love, survival, fun, and freedom, are just some of the goals that a
good person might have. When the goal is a matter of principle, we
call that idealism.
-</p>
-<p>My work on free software is motivated by an idealistic goal: spreading
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ My work on free software is motivated by an idealistic goal: spreading
freedom and cooperation. I want
to encourage free software to
spread, replacing proprietary software that forbids cooperation,
and thus make our society better.
-</p>
-<p>That’s the basic reason why the GNU General Public License is written
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ That’s the basic reason why the GNU General Public License is written
the way it is—as a copyleft.
All code added to a GPL-covered program
must be free software, even if it is put in a separate file. I make
@@ -72,106 +53,148 @@ software to make it free as well. I figure that since
proprietary
software developers use copyright to stop us from sharing, we
cooperators can use copyright to give other cooperators an advantage
of their own: they can use our code.
-</p>
-<p>Not everyone who uses the GNU GPL has this goal. Many years ago, a
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Not everyone who uses the GNU GPL has this goal. Many years ago, a
friend of mine was asked to rerelease a copylefted program under
-noncopyleft terms, and he responded more or less like this: “Sometimes I work
on free software, and sometimes I work on proprietary software—but when I work
on proprietary software, I expect to get <em>paid.</em>”
-</p>
-<p>He was willing to share his work with a community that shares
+noncopyleft terms, and he responded more or less like this: “Sometimes I work
on free software, and sometimes I work on proprietary software—but when I work
on proprietary software, I expect to get
+ <em>
+ paid.
+ </em>
+ ”
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ He was willing to share his work with a community that shares
software, but saw no reason to give a handout to a business making
products that would be off-limits to our community. His goal was
different from mine, but he decided that the GNU GPL was useful for
his goal too.
-</p>
-<p>If you want to accomplish something in the world, idealism is not
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ If you want to accomplish something in the world, idealism is not
enough—you need to choose a method that works to achieve the
goal. In other words, you need to be “pragmatic.” Is the
GPL pragmatic? Let’s look at its results.
-</p>
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GCC-3"></a>
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-C_002b_002b-compiler-1"></a>
-<p>Consider GNU C++. Why do we have a free C++ compiler? Only because
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GCC-3">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-C_002b_002b-compiler-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Consider GNU C++. Why do we have a free C++ compiler? Only because
the GNU GPL said it had to be free. GNU C++ was developed by an
-industry consortium,
-<a name="index-MCC"></a>
-MCC, starting from the
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-C-compiler-_0028see-also-GNU_002c-GCC_0029-4"></a>
-GNU C compiler. MCC
+industry consortium,
+ <a name="index-MCC">
+ </a>
+ MCC, starting from the
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-C-compiler-_0028see-also-GNU_002c-GCC_0029-4">
+ </a>
+ GNU C compiler. MCC
normally makes its work as proprietary as can be. But they made the
C++ front end free software, because the GNU GPL said that was the
only way they could release it. The C++ front end included many new
files, but since they were meant to be linked with GCC, the GPL
did apply to them. The benefit to our community is evident.
-</p>
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Objective-C"></a>
-<p>Consider GNU Objective C.
-<a name="index-NeXT"></a>
-NeXT initially wanted to make this front
-end proprietary; they proposed to release it as ‘<tt>.o</tt>’ files,
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Objective-C">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Consider GNU Objective C.
+ <a name="index-NeXT">
+ </a>
+ NeXT initially wanted to make this front
+end proprietary; they proposed to release it as ‘
+ <tt>
+ .o
+ </tt>
+ ’ files,
and let users link them with the rest of GCC, thinking this might be a
way around the GPL’s requirements. But our lawyer said that this
would not evade the requirements, that it was not allowed. And so
they made the Objective C front end free software.
-</p>
-<p>Those examples happened years ago, but the GNU GPL continues
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Those examples happened years ago, but the GNU GPL continues
to bring us more free software.
-</p>
-<a name="index-LGPL_002c-and-GNU-libraries-1"></a>
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-libraries-1"></a>
-<a name="index-libraries-_0028comp_002e_0029_002c-GNU-2"></a>
-<p>Many GNU libraries are covered by the GNU Lesser General Public
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-LGPL_002c-and-GNU-libraries-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-libraries-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-libraries-_0028comp_002e_0029_002c-GNU-2">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Many GNU libraries are covered by the GNU Lesser General Public
License, but not all. One GNU library which is covered by the
-ordinary GNU GPL is
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Readline-1"></a>
-<a
name="index-Readline-_0028see-also-both-libraries-_0028comp_002e_0029-and-GNU_0029"></a>
-Readline, which implements command-line editing.
+ordinary GNU GPL is
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Readline-1">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-Readline-_0028see-also-both-libraries-_0028comp_002e_0029-and-GNU_0029">
+ </a>
+ Readline, which implements command-line editing.
I once found out about a nonfree program which was designed
to use Readline, and told the developer this was not allowed. He
could have taken command-line editing out of the program, but what he
actually did was rerelease it under the GPL. Now it is free software.
-</p>
-<p>The programmers who write improvements to GCC (or
-<a name="index-Emacs_002c-GNU-6"></a>
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Emacs-6"></a>
-Emacs, or
-<a name="index-BASH-_0028Bourne-Again-Shell_0029_002c-GNU-3"></a>
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-BASH-_0028Bourne-Again-Shell_0029-3"></a>
-Bash, or
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The programmers who write improvements to GCC (or
+ <a name="index-Emacs_002c-GNU-6">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Emacs-6">
+ </a>
+ Emacs, or
+ <a name="index-BASH-_0028Bourne-Again-Shell_0029_002c-GNU-3">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-BASH-_0028Bourne-Again-Shell_0029-3">
+ </a>
+ Bash, or
Linux, or any GPL-covered program) are often employed by companies or
universities. When the programmer wants to return his improvements to
the community, and see his code in the next release, the boss may say,
“Hold on there—your code belongs to us! We don’t want to
share it; we have decided to turn your improved version into a
proprietary software product.”
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GCC-4"></a>
-</p>
-<p>Here the GNU GPL comes to the rescue. The programmer shows the boss
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GCC-4">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Here the GNU GPL comes to the rescue. The programmer shows the boss
that this proprietary software product would be copyright
infringement, and the boss realizes that he has only two choices:
release the new code as free software, or not at all. Almost always
he lets the programmer do as he intended all along, and the code goes
into the next release.
-</p>
-<a name="index-GPL-4"></a>
-<p>The GNU GPL is not Mr. Nice Guy. It says no to some of
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-GPL-4">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The GNU GPL is not Mr. Nice Guy. It says no to some of
the things that people sometimes want to do. There are users who say
that this is a bad thing—that the GPL “excludes”
some proprietary software developers who “need to be brought
into the free software community.”
-</p>
-<p>But we are not excluding them from our community; they are choosing
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ But we are not excluding them from our community; they are choosing
not to enter. Their decision to make software proprietary is a
decision to stay out of our community. Being in our community means
joining in cooperation with us; we cannot “bring them into our
community” if they don’t want to join.
-</p>
-<p>What we <em>can</em> do is offer them an inducement to join. The GNU
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ What we
+ <em>
+ can
+ </em>
+ do is offer them an inducement to join. The GNU
GPL is designed to make an inducement from our existing software:
“If you will make your software free, you can use this
code.” Of course, it won’t win ’em all, but it wins some of the
time.
-</p>
-<p>Proprietary software development does not contribute to our community,
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Proprietary software development does not contribute to our community,
but its developers often want handouts from us. Free software users
can offer free software developers strokes for the
ego—recognition and gratitude—but it can be very tempting
@@ -179,39 +202,52 @@ when a business tells you, “Just let us put your package
in our
proprietary program, and your program will be used by many thousands
of people!” The temptation can be powerful, but in the long run
we are all better off if we resist it.
-</p>
-<p>The temptation and pressure are harder to recognize when they come
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The temptation and pressure are harder to recognize when they come
indirectly, through free software organizations that have adopted a
-policy of catering to proprietary software. The
-<a
name="index-X-Consortium-_0028see-also-Open-Group_002c-its-successor_0029-2"></a>
-X Consortium (and its
-successor, the
-<a
name="index-Open-Group-_0028see-also-X-Consortium_002c-its-precursor_0029"></a>
-Open Group) offers an example: funded by companies that
+policy of catering to proprietary software. The
+ <a
name="index-X-Consortium-_0028see-also-Open-Group_002c-its-successor_0029-2">
+ </a>
+ X Consortium (and its
+successor, the
+ <a
name="index-Open-Group-_0028see-also-X-Consortium_002c-its-precursor_0029">
+ </a>
+ Open Group) offers an example: funded by companies that
made proprietary software, they strived for a decade to persuade
-programmers not to use copyleft. When the Open Group tried to make
-<a name="index-X11R6_002e4"></a>
-X11R6.4 nonfree software, those
+programmers not to use copyleft. When the Open Group tried to make
+ <a name="index-X11R6_002e4">
+ </a>
+ X11R6.4 nonfree software, those
of us who had resisted that pressure were glad that we did.
-</p>
-<p>In September 1998, several months after X11R6.4 was released with
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ In September 1998, several months after X11R6.4 was released with
nonfree distribution terms, the Open Group reversed its decision and
rereleased it under the same noncopyleft free software license that
was used for X11R6.3. Thank you, Open Group—but this subsequent
reversal does not invalidate the conclusions we draw from the fact
-that adding the restrictions was <em>possible.</em>
-<a
name="index-Open-Group-_0028see-also-X-Consortium_002c-its-precursor_0029-1"></a>
-</p>
-<a name="index-call-to-action_002c-use-copyleft"></a>
-<p>Pragmatically speaking, thinking about greater long-term goals will
+that adding the restrictions was
+ <em>
+ possible.
+ </em>
+ <a
name="index-Open-Group-_0028see-also-X-Consortium_002c-its-precursor_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-use-copyleft">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Pragmatically speaking, thinking about greater long-term goals will
strengthen your will to resist this pressure. If you focus your mind
on the freedom and community that you can build by staying firm, you
will find the strength to do it. “Stand for something, or you
will fall for anything.”
-</p>
-<p>And if cynics ridicule freedom, ridicule community…if
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And if cynics ridicule freedom, ridicule community…if
“hard-nosed realists” say that profit is the only
ideal…just ignore them, and use copyleft all the same.
-<a name="index-copyleft-_0028see-also-copyright_0029-6"></a>
-</p>
-</section></body></html>
+ <a name="index-copyleft-_0028see-also-copyright_0029-6">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+</section>
diff --git a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_23.html
b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_23.html
index e752769..107f033 100644
--- a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_23.html
+++ b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_23.html
@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
-<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/loose.dtd";>
-<html><!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
+<!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
Free Software Foundation
@@ -19,217 +18,264 @@ ISBN 978-0-9831592-0-9
Cover design by Rob Myers.
Cover photograph by Peter Hinely.
- --><!-- Created on February 18, 2016 by texi2html 1.82
-texi2html was written by:
- Lionel Cons <address@hidden> (original author)
- Karl Berry <address@hidden>
- Olaf Bachmann <address@hidden>
- and many others.
-Maintained by: Many creative people.
-Send bugs and suggestions to <address@hidden>
---><head><title>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 23. Anatomy of a Trivial
Patent</title><meta name="description" content="This is the second edition of
Richard Stallman's collection of essays."><meta name="keywords" content="Free
Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 23. Anatomy of a Trivial Patent"><meta
name="resource-type" content="document"><meta name="distribution"
content="global"><meta name="Generator" content="texi2html 1.82"><meta
http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; ch [...]
-<!--
-a.summary-letter {text-decoration: none}
-blockquote.smallquotation {font-size: smaller}
-pre.display {font-family: serif}
-pre.format {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-comment {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-preformatted {font-family: serif}
-pre.smalldisplay {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallexample {font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallformat {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smalllisp {font-size: smaller}
-span.roman {font-family:serif; font-weight:normal;}
-span.sansserif {font-family:sans-serif; font-weight:normal;}
-ul.toc {list-style: none}
--->
-</style><link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
href="../static/web-common/style.css"></head><body lang="en" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
text="#000000" link="#0000FF" vlink="#800080" alink="#FF0000" class="article">
+ -->
-<a name="Trivial-Patent"></a>
-<header><div id="logo"><a href="/"><img src="../static/gnu.svg" height="100"
width="100"></a></div><h1 class="book-title">Free Software, Free Society, 2nd
ed.</h1></header><section id="main"><a name="Anatomy-of-a-Trivial-Patent"></a>
-<h1 class="chapter"> 23. Anatomy of a Trivial Patent </h1>
-
-<a name="index-patents_002c-a-trivial-patent"></a>
-<p>Programmers are well aware that many of the existing software patents cover
+<section id="main">
+ <a name="Anatomy-of-a-Trivial-Patent">
+ </a>
+ <h1 class="chapter">
+ 23. Anatomy of a Trivial Patent
+ </h1>
+ <a name="index-patents_002c-a-trivial-patent">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Programmers are well aware that many of the existing software patents cover
laughably obvious ideas. Yet the patent system’s defenders often
argue that these ideas are nontrivial, obvious only in hindsight. And
it is surprisingly difficult to defeat them in debate. Why is
that?
-</p>
-<p>One reason is that any idea can be made to look complex when analyzed
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ One reason is that any idea can be made to look complex when analyzed
to death. Another reason is that these trivial ideas often look
quite complex as described in the patents themselves. The patent
system’s defenders can point to the complex description and say,
“How can anything this complex be obvious?”
-</p>
-<p>I will use an example to show you how. Here’s claim number one
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ I will use an example to show you how. Here’s claim number one
from US patent number 5,963,916, applied for in October 1996:
-</p>
-<blockquote class="smallquotation"><p>1. A method for enabling a remote user
to preview a portion of a pre-recorded music product from a network web site
containing pre-selected portions of different pre-recorded music products,
using a computer, a computer display and a telecommunications link between the
remote user’s computer and the network web site, the method comprising the
steps of:
-</p>
-<ul><li>
-using the remote user’s computer to establish a telecommunications link to the
network web site wherein the network web site comprises (i) a central host
server coupled to a communications network for retrieving and transmitting the
pre-selected portion of the pre-recorded music product upon request by a remote
user and (ii) a central storage device for storing pre-selected portions of a
plurality of different pre-recorded music products;
-
-</li><li>
-transmitting user identification data from the remote user’s computer to the
central host server thereby allowing the central host server to identify and
track the user’s progress through the network web site;
-
-</li><li>
-choosing at least one pre-selected portion of the pre-recorded music products
from the central host server;
-
-</li><li>
-receiving the chosen pre-selected portion of the pre-recorded products; and
-
-</li><li>
-interactively previewing the received chosen pre-selected portion of the
pre-recorded music product.
-
-</li></ul></blockquote>
-
-<p>That sure looks like a complex system, right? Surely it took a
+ </p>
+ <blockquote class="smallquotation">
+ <p>
+ 1. A method for enabling a remote user to preview a portion of a
pre-recorded music product from a network web site containing pre-selected
portions of different pre-recorded music products, using a computer, a computer
display and a telecommunications link between the remote user’s computer and
the network web site, the method comprising the steps of:
+ </p>
+ <ul>
+ <li>
+ using the remote user’s computer to establish a telecommunications link to
the network web site wherein the network web site comprises (i) a central host
server coupled to a communications network for retrieving and transmitting the
pre-selected portion of the pre-recorded music product upon request by a remote
user and (ii) a central storage device for storing pre-selected portions of a
plurality of different pre-recorded music products;
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ transmitting user identification data from the remote user’s computer to
the central host server thereby allowing the central host server to identify
and track the user’s progress through the network web site;
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ choosing at least one pre-selected portion of the pre-recorded music
products from the central host server;
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ receiving the chosen pre-selected portion of the pre-recorded products; and
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ interactively previewing the received chosen pre-selected portion of the
pre-recorded music product.
+ </li>
+ </ul>
+ </blockquote>
+ <p>
+ That sure looks like a complex system, right? Surely it took a
real clever guy to think of this? No, but it took cleverness to make
it seem so complex. Let’s analyze where the complexity comes
from:
-</p>
-<blockquote class="smallquotation">
-<p>1. A method for enabling a remote user to preview a portion of a
pre-recorded music product from a network web site containing pre-selected
portions
-</p>
-</blockquote>
-<p>That states the principal part of their idea. They put selections
+ </p>
+ <blockquote class="smallquotation">
+ <p>
+ 1. A method for enabling a remote user to preview a portion of a
pre-recorded music product from a network web site containing pre-selected
portions
+ </p>
+ </blockquote>
+ <p>
+ That states the principal part of their idea. They put selections
from certain pieces of music on a server so a user can listen to
them.
-</p>
-<blockquote class="smallquotation">
-<p> of different pre-recorded music products,
-</p>
-</blockquote>
-<p>This emphasizes their server stores selections from more than one
+ </p>
+ <blockquote class="smallquotation">
+ <p>
+ of different pre-recorded music products,
+ </p>
+ </blockquote>
+ <p>
+ This emphasizes their server stores selections from more than one
piece of music.
-</p>
-<p>It is a basic principle of computer science is that if a computer
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ It is a basic principle of computer science is that if a computer
can do a thing once, it can do that thing many times, on different
data each time. Many patents pretend that applying this principle to
a specific case makes an “invention.”
-</p>
-<blockquote class="smallquotation">
-<p> using
a computer, a com-<br>puter display and a telecommunications link between the
remote user’s computer and the network web site,
-</p>
-</blockquote>
-<p>This says they are using a server on a network.
-</p><blockquote class="smallquotation">
-<p> the method comprising the steps
of:
-</p><ul><li>
-using the remote user’s computer to establish a telecommunications
+ </p>
+ <blockquote class="smallquotation">
+ <p>
+ using a computer, a com-
+ <br>
+ puter display and a telecommunications link between the remote user’s
computer and the network web site,
+ </br>
+ </p>
+ </blockquote>
+ <p>
+ This says they are using a server on a network.
+ </p>
+ <blockquote class="smallquotation">
+ <p>
+ the method comprising the steps of:
+ </p>
+ <ul>
+ <li>
+ using the remote user’s computer to establish a telecommunications
link to the network web site
-</li></ul></blockquote>
-<p>This says that the user connects to the server over the network.
+ </li>
+ </ul>
+ </blockquote>
+ <p>
+ This says that the user connects to the server over the network.
(That’s the way one uses a server.)
-</p><blockquote class="smallquotation">
-<p> wherein the network web site
comprises<br> (i) a central host server
+ </p>
+ <blockquote class="smallquotation">
+ <p>
+ wherein the network web site comprises
+ <br>
+ (i) a central host server
coupled to a communications network
-</p>
-</blockquote>
-
-
-<p>This informs us that the server is on the net. (That is typical of
+ </br>
+ </p>
+ </blockquote>
+ <p>
+ This informs us that the server is on the net. (That is typical of
servers.)
-</p>
-<blockquote class="smallquotation">
-<p>
for re-<br> trieving and transmitting the pre-selected
portion of the pre-recorded<br> music product upon request by a remote
user
-</p>
-</blockquote>
-<p>This repeats the general idea stated in the first two lines.
-</p>
-<blockquote class="smallquotation">
-<p> and
(ii) a central stor-<br> age device for storing pre-selected portions of
a plurality of different<br> pre-recorded music products;
-</p>
-</blockquote>
-<p>They have decided to put a hard disk (or equivalent) in their
+ </p>
+ <blockquote class="smallquotation">
+ <p>
+ for re-
+ <br>
+ trieving and transmitting the pre-selected portion of the pre-recorded
+ <br>
+ music product upon request by a remote user
+ </br>
+ </br>
+ </p>
+ </blockquote>
+ <p>
+ This repeats the general idea stated in the first two lines.
+ </p>
+ <blockquote class="smallquotation">
+ <p>
+ and (ii) a central stor-
+ <br>
+ age device for storing pre-selected portions of a plurality of different
+ <br>
+ pre-recorded music products;
+ </br>
+ </br>
+ </p>
+ </blockquote>
+ <p>
+ They have decided to put a hard disk (or equivalent) in their
computer and store the music samples on that. Ever since around 1980,
this has been the normal way to store anything on a computer for rapid
access.
-</p>
-<p>Note how they emphasize once again the fact that they can store
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Note how they emphasize once again the fact that they can store
more than one selection on this disk. Of course, every file system
will let you store more than one file.
-</p>
-<blockquote class="smallquotation">
-<ul><li>
-transmitting user identification data from the remote user’s computer to the
central host server thereby allowing the central host server to identify and
track the user’s progress through the network web site;
-
-</li></ul></blockquote>
-<p>This says that they keep track of who you are and what you
+ </p>
+ <blockquote class="smallquotation">
+ <ul>
+ <li>
+ transmitting user identification data from the remote user’s computer to
the central host server thereby allowing the central host server to identify
and track the user’s progress through the network web site;
+ </li>
+ </ul>
+ </blockquote>
+ <p>
+ This says that they keep track of who you are and what you
access—a common (though nasty) thing for web servers to do. I
believe it was common already in 1996.
-</p>
-<blockquote class="smallquotation">
-<ul><li>
-choosing at least one pre-selected portion of the pre-recorded music products
from the central host server;
-
-</li></ul></blockquote>
-<p>In other words, the user clicks to say which link to follow. That
+ </p>
+ <blockquote class="smallquotation">
+ <ul>
+ <li>
+ choosing at least one pre-selected portion of the pre-recorded music
products from the central host server;
+ </li>
+ </ul>
+ </blockquote>
+ <p>
+ In other words, the user clicks to say which link to follow. That
is typical for web servers; if they had found another way to do it,
that might have been an invention.
-</p>
-<blockquote class="smallquotation">
-<ul><li>
-receiving the chosen pre-selected portion of the
+ </p>
+ <blockquote class="smallquotation">
+ <ul>
+ <li>
+ receiving the chosen pre-selected portion of the
pre-recorded products; and
-
-</li></ul></blockquote>
-<p>When you follow a link, your browser reads the contents. This is
+ </li>
+ </ul>
+ </blockquote>
+ <p>
+ When you follow a link, your browser reads the contents. This is
typical behavior for a web browser.
-</p>
-<blockquote class="smallquotation">
-<ul><li>
-interactively previewing the received chosen pre-selected
+ </p>
+ <blockquote class="smallquotation">
+ <ul>
+ <li>
+ interactively previewing the received chosen pre-selected
portion of the pre-recorded music product.
-
-</li></ul></blockquote>
-<p>This says that your browser plays the music for you. (That is what
+ </li>
+ </ul>
+ </blockquote>
+ <p>
+ This says that your browser plays the music for you. (That is what
many browsers do, when you follow a link to an audio file.)
-</p>
-<p>Now you see how they padded this claim to make it into a complex
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Now you see how they padded this claim to make it into a complex
idea: they combined their own idea (stated in two lines of text) with
important aspects of what computers, networks, web servers, and web
browsers do. This adds up to the so-called invention
for which they received the patent.
-</p>
-<p>This example is typical of software patents. Even the occasional
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ This example is typical of software patents. Even the occasional
patent whose idea is nontrivial has the same sort of added
complication.
-</p>
-<p>Now look at a subsequent claim:
-</p>
-<blockquote class="smallquotation">
-<p>3. The method of [149]claim 1 wherein the central memory device comprises a
plurality of compact disc-read only memory (CD-ROMs).
-</p>
-</blockquote>
-<p>What they are saying here is, “Even if you don’t think that
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Now look at a subsequent claim:
+ </p>
+ <blockquote class="smallquotation">
+ <p>
+ 3. The method of [149]claim 1 wherein the central memory device comprises a
plurality of compact disc-read only memory (CD-ROMs).
+ </p>
+ </blockquote>
+ <p>
+ What they are saying here is, “Even if you don’t think that
claim 1 is really an invention, using CD-ROMs to store the data makes
it an invention for sure. An average system designer would never have
thought of storing data on a CD.”
-</p>
-<p>Now look at the next claim:
-</p>
-<blockquote class="smallquotation">
-<a name="index-RAID-array"></a>
-<p>4. The method of [150]claim 1 wherein the central memory device comprises a
RAID array drive.
-</p>
-</blockquote>
-<p>A RAID array is a group of disks set up to work like one big disk,
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Now look at the next claim:
+ </p>
+ <blockquote class="smallquotation">
+ <a name="index-RAID-array">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ 4. The method of [150]claim 1 wherein the central memory device comprises a
RAID array drive.
+ </p>
+ </blockquote>
+ <p>
+ A RAID array is a group of disks set up to work like one big disk,
with the special feature that, even if one of the disks in the array
has a failure and stops working, all the data are still available on
the other disks in the group. Such arrays have been commercially
available since long before 1996, and are a standard way of storing
data for high availability. But these brilliant inventors have
patented the use of a RAID array for this particular purpose.
-</p>
-<p>Trivial as it is, this patent would not necessarily be found
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Trivial as it is, this patent would not necessarily be found
legally invalid if there is a lawsuit about it. Not only the US
Patent Office but the courts as well tend to apply a very low standard
when judging whether a patent is “unobvious.” This patent
might pass muster, according to them.
-</p>
-<p>What’s more, the courts are reluctant to overrule the Patent
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ What’s more, the courts are reluctant to overrule the Patent
Office, so there is a better chance of getting a patent overturned if
you can show a court prior art that the Patent Office did not
consider. If the courts are willing to entertain a higher standard in
@@ -237,8 +283,9 @@ judging unobviousness, it helps to save the prior art for
them. Thus,
the proposals to “make the system work better” by
providing the Patent Office with a better database of prior art could
instead make things worse.
-</p>
-<p>It is very hard to make a patent system behave reasonably; it is a
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ It is very hard to make a patent system behave reasonably; it is a
complex bureaucracy and tends to follow its structural imperatives
regardless of what it is “supposed” to do. The only
practical way to get rid of the many obvious patents on software
@@ -246,15 +293,21 @@ features and business practices is to get rid of all
patents in those
fields. Fortunately, that would be no loss: the unobvious patents in
the software field do no good either. What software patents do is put
software developers and users under threat.
-</p>
-<p>The patent system is supposed, intended, to promote progress, and
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The patent system is supposed, intended, to promote progress, and
those who benefit from software patents ask us to believe without
question that they do have that effect. But programmers’ experience
shows otherwise. New theoretical analysis shows that this is no
paradox. (See
-<a
href="http://researchoninnovation.org/patent.pdf";>http://researchoninnovation.org/patent.pdf</a>.)
There is no
+ <a href="http://researchoninnovation.org/patent.pdf";>
+ http://researchoninnovation.org/patent.pdf
+ </a>
+ .) There is no
reason why society should expose software developers and users to the
danger of software patents.
-</p>
-<a name="index-patents_002c-a-trivial-patent-1"></a>
-<hr size="2"></section></body></html>
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-patents_002c-a-trivial-patent-1">
+ </a>
+ <hr size="2"/>
+</section>
diff --git a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_24.html
b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_24.html
index 4a23dae..eea6eb5 100644
--- a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_24.html
+++ b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_24.html
@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
-<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/loose.dtd";>
-<html><!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
+<!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
Free Software Foundation
@@ -19,166 +18,208 @@ ISBN 978-0-9831592-0-9
Cover design by Rob Myers.
Cover photograph by Peter Hinely.
- --><!-- Created on February 18, 2016 by texi2html 1.82
-texi2html was written by:
- Lionel Cons <address@hidden> (original author)
- Karl Berry <address@hidden>
- Olaf Bachmann <address@hidden>
- and many others.
-Maintained by: Many creative people.
-Send bugs and suggestions to <address@hidden>
---><head><title>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 24. Software Patents and
Literary Patents</title><meta name="description" content="This is the second
edition of Richard Stallman's collection of essays."><meta name="keywords"
content="Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 24. Software Patents and
Literary Patents"><meta name="resource-type" content="document"><meta
name="distribution" content="global"><meta name="Generator" content="texi2html
1.82"><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" co [...]
-<!--
-a.summary-letter {text-decoration: none}
-blockquote.smallquotation {font-size: smaller}
-pre.display {font-family: serif}
-pre.format {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-comment {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-preformatted {font-family: serif}
-pre.smalldisplay {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallexample {font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallformat {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smalllisp {font-size: smaller}
-span.roman {font-family:serif; font-weight:normal;}
-span.sansserif {font-family:sans-serif; font-weight:normal;}
-ul.toc {list-style: none}
--->
-</style><link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
href="../static/web-common/style.css"></head><body lang="en" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
text="#000000" link="#0000FF" vlink="#800080" alink="#FF0000" class="article">
+ -->
-<a name="SPLP"></a>
-<header><div id="logo"><a href="/"><img src="../static/gnu.svg" height="100"
width="100"></a></div><h1 class="book-title">Free Software, Free Society, 2nd
ed.</h1></header><section id="main"><a
name="Software-Patents-and-Literary-Patents"></a>
-<h1 class="chapter"> 24. Software Patents and Literary Patents </h1>
-
-<a name="index-patents_002c-analogy-between-literary-and-software"></a>
-<a name="index-Hugo_002c-Victor"></a>
-<a
name="index-patents_002c-proposed-European-Union-software-patents-directive-1"></a>
-<a
name="index-European-Union_002c-proposed-European-Union-software-patents-directive-1"></a>
-<p>When politicians consider the question of software patents, they are
+<section id="main">
+ <a name="Software-Patents-and-Literary-Patents">
+ </a>
+ <h1 class="chapter">
+ 24. Software Patents and Literary Patents
+ </h1>
+ <a name="index-patents_002c-analogy-between-literary-and-software">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Hugo_002c-Victor">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-patents_002c-proposed-European-Union-software-patents-directive-1">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-European-Union_002c-proposed-European-Union-software-patents-directive-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ When politicians consider the question of software patents, they are
usually voting blind; not being programmers, they don’t understand
what software patents really do. They often think patents are similar
to copyright law (“except for some details”)—which
-is not the case. For instance, when I publicly asked
-<a name="index-Devedjian_002c-Minister-Patrick"></a>
-Patrick
-Devedjian, then Minister for Industry in
-<a name="index-France-1"></a>
-France, how France would vote
+is not the case. For instance, when I publicly asked
+ <a name="index-Devedjian_002c-Minister-Patrick">
+ </a>
+ Patrick
+Devedjian, then Minister for Industry in
+ <a name="index-France-1">
+ </a>
+ France, how France would vote
on the issue of software patents, Devedjian responded with an
impassioned defense of copyright law, praising Victor Hugo for his
role in the adoption of copyright. (The misleading
term “intellectual property” promotes this confusion—one of the reasons it
should never be used.)
-</p>
-<p>Those who imagine effects like those of copyright law cannot grasp the
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Those who imagine effects like those of copyright law cannot grasp the
disastrous effects of software patents. We can use Victor Hugo as an
example to illustrate the difference.
-</p>
-<p>A novel and a modern complex program have certain points in common:
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ A novel and a modern complex program have certain points in common:
each one is large, and implements many ideas in combination. So let’s
follow the analogy, and suppose that patent law had been applied to
novels in the 1800s; suppose that states such as France had permitted
the patenting of literary ideas. How would this have affected Victor
Hugo’s writing? How would the effects of literary patents compare
with the effects of literary copyright?
-</p>
-<a name="index-Les-Miserables_002c-Victor-Hugo"></a>
-<p>Consider Victor Hugo’s novel <cite>Les Misérables.</cite> Since he
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-Les-Miserables_002c-Victor-Hugo">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Consider Victor Hugo’s novel
+ <cite>
+ Les Misérables.
+ </cite>
+ Since he
wrote it, the copyright belonged only to him. He
did not have to fear that some stranger could sue him for copyright
infringement and win. That was impossible, because copyright covers
only the details of a work of authorship, not the ideas embodied in
-them, and it only restricts copying. Hugo had not copied <cite>Les
-Misérables,</cite> so he was not in danger from copyright.
-</p>
-<p>Patents work differently. Patents cover ideas; each patent is a
+them, and it only restricts copying. Hugo had not copied
+ <cite>
+ Les
+Misérables,
+ </cite>
+ so he was not in danger from copyright.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Patents work differently. Patents cover ideas; each patent is a
monopoly on practicing some idea, which is described in the patent
itself. Here’s one example of a hypothetical literary patent:
-</p>
-<ul><li>
-Claim 1: a communication process that represents in the mind of a reader the
concept of a character who has been in jail for a long time and becomes bitter
towards society and humankind.
-
-</li><li>
-Claim 2: a communication process according to claim 1, wherein said character
subsequently finds moral redemption through the kindness of another.
-
-</li><li>
-Claim 3: a communication process according to claims 1 and 2, wherein said
character changes his name during the story.
-
-</li></ul><a
name="index-Valjean_002c-literary-character-Jean-_0028see-also-Les-Miserables_0029"></a>
-<p>If such a patent had existed in 1862 when <cite>Les Misérables</cite> was
+ </p>
+ <ul>
+ <li>
+ Claim 1: a communication process that represents in the mind of a reader
the concept of a character who has been in jail for a long time and becomes
bitter towards society and humankind.
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ Claim 2: a communication process according to claim 1, wherein said
character subsequently finds moral redemption through the kindness of another.
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ Claim 3: a communication process according to claims 1 and 2, wherein said
character changes his name during the story.
+ </li>
+ </ul>
+ <a
name="index-Valjean_002c-literary-character-Jean-_0028see-also-Les-Miserables_0029">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ If such a patent had existed in 1862 when
+ <cite>
+ Les Misérables
+ </cite>
+ was
published, the novel would have conflicted with all three claims,
since all these things happened to Jean Valjean in the novel. Victor
Hugo could have been sued, and if sued, he would have lost. The novel
could have been prohibited—in effect, censored—by the
patent holder.
-</p>
-<p>Now consider this hypothetical literary patent:
-</p>
-<ul><li> Claim 1: a communication process that represents in the mind of a
reader the concept of a character who has been in jail for a long time and
subsequently changes his name.
-</li></ul><p><cite>Les Misérables</cite> would have been prohibited by that
patent too,
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Now consider this hypothetical literary patent:
+ </p>
+ <ul>
+ <li>
+ Claim 1: a communication process that represents in the mind of a reader
the concept of a character who has been in jail for a long time and
subsequently changes his name.
+ </li>
+ </ul>
+ <p>
+ <cite>
+ Les Misérables
+ </cite>
+ would have been prohibited by that patent too,
because this description too fits the life story of Jean Valjean. And
here’s another hypothetical patent:
-</p>
-<ul><li>
-Claim 1: a communication process that represents in the mind of a reader the
concept of a character who finds moral redemption and then changes his name.
-</li></ul><p>Jean Valjean would have been forbidden by this patent too.
-</p>
-<p>All three patents would cover, and prohibit, the life story of this one
+ </p>
+ <ul>
+ <li>
+ Claim 1: a communication process that represents in the mind of a reader
the concept of a character who finds moral redemption and then changes his name.
+ </li>
+ </ul>
+ <p>
+ Jean Valjean would have been forbidden by this patent too.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ All three patents would cover, and prohibit, the life story of this one
character. They overlap, but they do not precisely duplicate each other,
so they could all be valid simultaneously; all three patent holders
could have sued Victor Hugo. Any one of them could have prohibited
-publication of <cite>Les Misérables.</cite>
-</p>
-<p>This patent also could have been violated:
-</p>
-<ul><li>
-Claim 1: a communication process that presents a character whose given name
matches the last syllable of his family name.
-</li></ul><p>through the name “Jean Valjean,” but at least this patent
+publication of
+ <cite>
+ Les Misérables.
+ </cite>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ This patent also could have been violated:
+ </p>
+ <ul>
+ <li>
+ Claim 1: a communication process that presents a character whose given name
matches the last syllable of his family name.
+ </li>
+ </ul>
+ <p>
+ through the name “Jean Valjean,” but at least this patent
would have been easy to avoid.
-</p>
-<p>You might think that these ideas are so simple that no patent office
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ You might think that these ideas are so simple that no patent office
would have issued them. We programmers are often amazed by the
simplicity of the ideas that real software patents cover—for
-instance, the
-<a name="index-European-Patent-Office"></a>
-European Patent Office has issued a patent on the
+instance, the
+ <a name="index-European-Patent-Office">
+ </a>
+ European Patent Office has issued a patent on the
progress bar, and a patent on accepting payment via credit cards.
These patents would be laughable if they were not so dangerous.
-</p>
-<p>Other aspects of <cite>Les Misérables</cite> could also have
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Other aspects of
+ <cite>
+ Les Misérables
+ </cite>
+ could also have
run afoul of
patents. For instance, there could have been a patent on a
fictionalized portrayal of the Battle of Waterloo, or a patent on
using Parisian slang in fiction. Two more lawsuits. In fact, there
is no limit to the number of different patents that might have been
-applicable for suing the author of a work such as <cite>Les
-Misérables.</cite> All the patent holders would say they deserved a
+applicable for suing the author of a work such as
+ <cite>
+ Les
+Misérables.
+ </cite>
+ All the patent holders would say they deserved a
reward for the literary progress that their patented ideas represent,
but these obstacles would not promote progress in literature, they
would only obstruct it.
-</p>
-<p>However, a very broad patent could have made all these issues
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ However, a very broad patent could have made all these issues
irrelevant. Imagine a patent with broad claims like these:
-
-</p>
-<ul><li>
-A communication process structured with narration that continues
+ </p>
+ <ul>
+ <li>
+ A communication process structured with narration that continues
through many pages.
-
-</li><li>
-A narration structure sometimes resembling a fugue or
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ A narration structure sometimes resembling a fugue or
improvisation.
-
-</li><li>
-Intrigue articulated around the confrontation of specific
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ Intrigue articulated around the confrontation of specific
characters, each in turn setting traps for the others.
-
-</li><li>
-Narration that presents many layers of society.
-
-</li><li>
-Narration that shows the wheels of hidden conspiracy.
-
-</li></ul><p>Who would the patent holders have been? They could have been
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ Narration that presents many layers of society.
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ Narration that shows the wheels of hidden conspiracy.
+ </li>
+ </ul>
+ <p>
+ Who would the patent holders have been? They could have been
other novelists, perhaps Dumas or Balzac, who had written such
novels—but not necessarily. It isn’t required to write a
program to patent a software idea, so if our hypothetical literary
@@ -186,48 +227,63 @@ patents follow the real patent system, these patent
holders would not
have had to write novels, or stories, or anything—except patent
applications. Patent parasite companies, businesses that produce
nothing except threats and lawsuits, are booming nowadays.
-</p>
-<p>Given these broad patents, Victor Hugo would not have reached
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Given these broad patents, Victor Hugo would not have reached
the point of asking what patents might get him sued for using the
character of Jean Valjean, because he could not even have considered
writing a novel of this kind.
-<a
name="index-Valjean_002c-literary-character-Jean-_0028see-also-Les-Miserables_0029-1"></a>
-<a name="index-Les-Miserables_002c-Victor-Hugo-1"></a>
-<a name="index-Hugo_002c-Victor-1"></a>
-</p>
-<p>This analogy can help nonprogrammers see what software patents
+ <a
name="index-Valjean_002c-literary-character-Jean-_0028see-also-Les-Miserables_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Les-Miserables_002c-Victor-Hugo-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Hugo_002c-Victor-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ This analogy can help nonprogrammers see what software patents
do. Software patents cover features, such as defining abbreviations in
a word processor, or natural order recalculation in a spreadsheet.
Patents cover algorithms that programs need to use. Patents cover
-aspects of file formats, such as Microsoft’s
-<a name="index-Microsoft_002c-OOXML-format-_0028see-also-patents_0029"></a>
-OOXML format.
-<a name="index-MPEG_002d2"></a>
-MPEG 2
+aspects of file formats, such as Microsoft’s
+ <a name="index-Microsoft_002c-OOXML-format-_0028see-also-patents_0029">
+ </a>
+ OOXML format.
+ <a name="index-MPEG_002d2">
+ </a>
+ MPEG 2
video format is covered by 39 different US patents.
-</p>
-<p>Just as one novel could run afoul of many different literary patents at
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Just as one novel could run afoul of many different literary patents at
once, one program can be prohibited by many different patents at once.
It is so much work to identify all the patents that appear to apply
to a large program that only one such study has been done. A 2004 study of
-Linux, the
-<a name="index-kernel_002c-Linux-2"></a>
-<a name="index-Linux-kernel-2"></a>
-kernel of the GNU/Linux operating system, found 283
+Linux, the
+ <a name="index-kernel_002c-Linux-2">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Linux-kernel-2">
+ </a>
+ kernel of the GNU/Linux operating system, found 283
different US software patents that seemed to cover it. That is to
say, each of these 283 different patents forbids some computational
process found somewhere in the thousands of pages of source code of
Linux. At the time, Linux was around 1 percent of the whole
GNU/Linux system. How many patents might there be that a distributor
of the whole system could be sued under?
-</p>
-<a name="index-call-to-action_002c-do-not-authorize-software-patents"></a>
-<p>The way to prevent software patents from bollixing software
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-do-not-authorize-software-patents">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The way to prevent software patents from bollixing software
development is simple: don’t authorize them. This ought to be easy,
since most patent laws have provisions against software patents. They
typically say that “software per se” cannot be patented.
But patent offices around the world are trying to twist the words and
issuing patents on the ideas implemented in programs. Unless this is
blocked, the result will be to put all software developers in danger.
-<a name="index-patents_002c-analogy-between-literary-and-software-1"></a>
-</p><hr size="2"></section></body></html>
+ <a name="index-patents_002c-analogy-between-literary-and-software-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <hr size="2"/>
+</section>
diff --git a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_25.html
b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_25.html
index eefebdc..36589ce 100644
--- a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_25.html
+++ b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_25.html
@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
-<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/loose.dtd";>
-<html><!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
+<!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
Free Software Foundation
@@ -19,66 +18,54 @@ ISBN 978-0-9831592-0-9
Cover design by Rob Myers.
Cover photograph by Peter Hinely.
- --><!-- Created on February 18, 2016 by texi2html 1.82
-texi2html was written by:
- Lionel Cons <address@hidden> (original author)
- Karl Berry <address@hidden>
- Olaf Bachmann <address@hidden>
- and many others.
-Maintained by: Many creative people.
-Send bugs and suggestions to <address@hidden>
---><head><title>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 25. The Danger of
Software Patents</title><meta name="description" content="This is the second
edition of Richard Stallman's collection of essays."><meta name="keywords"
content="Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 25. The Danger of Software
Patents"><meta name="resource-type" content="document"><meta
name="distribution" content="global"><meta name="Generator" content="texi2html
1.82"><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/ht [...]
-<!--
-a.summary-letter {text-decoration: none}
-blockquote.smallquotation {font-size: smaller}
-pre.display {font-family: serif}
-pre.format {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-comment {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-preformatted {font-family: serif}
-pre.smalldisplay {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallexample {font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallformat {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smalllisp {font-size: smaller}
-span.roman {font-family:serif; font-weight:normal;}
-span.sansserif {font-family:sans-serif; font-weight:normal;}
-ul.toc {list-style: none}
--->
-</style><link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
href="../static/web-common/style.css"></head><body lang="en" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
text="#000000" link="#0000FF" vlink="#800080" alink="#FF0000" class="article">
+ -->
-<a name="DSP"></a>
-<header><div id="logo"><a href="/"><img src="../static/gnu.svg" height="100"
width="100"></a></div><h1 class="book-title">Free Software, Free Society, 2nd
ed.</h1></header><section id="main"><a
name="The-Danger-of-Software-Patents"></a>
-<h1 class="chapter"> 25. The Danger of Software Patents </h1>
-
-<blockquote class="smallquotation"><p>This is an unedited transcript of the
talk presented by Richard Stallman on 8 October 2009 at Victoria University of
Wellington, in Wellington, New Zealand.
-</p></blockquote>
-<p>I’m most known for starting the free software movement and leading
-development of the
-<a name="index-GNU-_0028see-also-both-software-and-GNU_0029-5"></a>
-GNU operating system—although most of the people
+<section id="main">
+ <a name="The-Danger-of-Software-Patents">
+ </a>
+ <h1 class="chapter">
+ 25. The Danger of Software Patents
+ </h1>
+ <blockquote class="smallquotation">
+ <p>
+ This is an unedited transcript of the talk presented by Richard Stallman on
8 October 2009 at Victoria University of Wellington, in Wellington, New Zealand.
+ </p>
+ </blockquote>
+ <p>
+ I’m most known for starting the free software movement and leading
+development of the
+ <a name="index-GNU-_0028see-also-both-software-and-GNU_0029-5">
+ </a>
+ GNU operating system—although most of the people
who use the system mistakenly believe it’s Linux and think it was
started by somebody else a decade later. But I’m not going to be
speaking about any of that today. I’m here to talk about a legal
danger to all software developers, distributors, and users: the danger
of patents—on computational ideas, computational techniques, an idea
for something you can do on a computer.
-</p>
-<a name="index-patents_002c-difference-between-copyrights-and"></a>
-<p>Now, to understand this issue, the first thing you need to realize is
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-patents_002c-difference-between-copyrights-and">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Now, to understand this issue, the first thing you need to realize is
that patent law has nothing to do with copyright law—they’re totally
different. Whatever you learn about one of them, you can be sure it
doesn’t apply to the other.
-</p>
-<p>So, for example, any time a person makes a statement about
-<a
name="index-_0060_0060intellectual-property_002c_0027_0027-bias-and-fallacy-of-term-_0028see-also-ownership_0029-8"></a>
-“intellectual property,” that’s spreading confusion, because it’s
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ So, for example, any time a person makes a statement about
+ <a
name="index-_0060_0060intellectual-property_002c_0027_0027-bias-and-fallacy-of-term-_0028see-also-ownership_0029-8">
+ </a>
+ “intellectual property,” that’s spreading confusion, because it’s
lumping together not only these two laws but also at least a dozen
others. They’re all different, and the result is any statement which
purports to be about “intellectual property” is pure confusion—either
the person making the statement is confused, or the person is trying
to confuse others. But either way, whether it’s accidental or
malicious, it’s confusion.
-</p>
-<p>Protect yourself from this confusion by rejecting any statement which
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Protect yourself from this confusion by rejecting any statement which
makes use of that term. The only way to make thoughtful comments and
think clear thoughts about any one of these laws is to distinguish
it first from all the others, and talk or think about one particular
@@ -86,15 +73,17 @@ law, so that we can understand what it actually does and
then form
conclusions about it. So I’ll be talking about patent law, and what
happens in those countries which have allowed patent law to restrict
software.
-</p>
-<p>So, what does a patent do? A patent is an explicit, government-issued
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ So, what does a patent do? A patent is an explicit, government-issued
monopoly on using a certain idea. In the patent there’s a part called
the claims, which describe exactly what you’re not allowed to do
(although they’re written in a way you probably can’t understand). It’s
a struggle to figure out what those prohibitions actually mean, and
they may go on for many pages of fine print.
-</p>
-<p>So the patent typically lasts for 20 years, which is a fairly long
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ So the patent typically lasts for 20 years, which is a fairly long
time in our field. Twenty years ago there was no World Wide Web—a
tremendous amount of the use of computers goes on in an area which
wasn’t even possible to propose 20 years ago. So of course everything
@@ -103,45 +92,57 @@ least in some aspect it is new. So if patents had been
applied for
we’d be prohibited from doing all of it, and we may be prohibited from
doing all of it in countries that have been foolish enough to have
such a policy.
-</p>
-<p>Most of the time, when people describe the function of the patent
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Most of the time, when people describe the function of the patent
system, they have a vested interest in the system. They may be patent
lawyers, or they may work in the Patent Office, or they may be in the
patent office of a megacorporation, so they want you to like the
system.
-</p>
-<a name="index-Economist"></a>
-<p>The <cite>Economist</cite> once referred to the patent system as “a
time-consuming
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-Economist">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The
+ <cite>
+ Economist
+ </cite>
+ once referred to the patent system as “a time-consuming
lottery.” If you’ve ever seen publicity for a lottery, you understand
how it works: they dwell on the very unlikely probability of winning,
and they don’t talk about the overwhelming likelihood of losing. In
this way, they intentionally and systematically present a biased
picture of what’s likely to happen to you, without actually lying
about any particular fact.
-</p>
-<p>It’s the same way for the publicity for the patent system: they talk
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ It’s the same way for the publicity for the patent system: they talk
about what it’s like to walk down the street with a patent in your
pocket—or first of all, what it’s like to get a patent, then what
it’s like to have a patent in your pocket, and every so often you can
pull it out and point it at somebody and say, “Give me your money.”
-</p>
-<p>To compensate for their bias, I’m going to describe it from the other
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ To compensate for their bias, I’m going to describe it from the other
side, the victim side—what it’s like for people who want to develop
or distribute or run software. You have to worry that any day someone
might walk up to you and point a patent at you and say, “Give me your
money.”
-</p>
-<p>If you want to develop software in a country that allows software
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ If you want to develop software in a country that allows software
patents, and you want to work with patent law, what will you have to
do?
-</p>
-<p>You could try to make a list of all the ideas that one might be able
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ You could try to make a list of all the ideas that one might be able
to find in the program that you’re about to write, aside from the fact
that you don’t know that when you start writing the program. [But] even
after you finish writing the program you wouldn’t be able to make such
a list.
-</p>
-<p>The reason is…in the process
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The reason is…in the process
you conceived of it in one particular way—you’ve got a mental
structure to apply to your design. And because of that, it will block
you from seeing other structures that somebody might use to understand
@@ -152,8 +153,9 @@ different ideas, and it would be hard for you to see what
those other
ideas are. But nonetheless they’re implemented in your program, and
those patents could prohibit your program, if those ideas are
patented.
-</p>
-<p>For instance, suppose there were graphical-idea patents and you wanted
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ For instance, suppose there were graphical-idea patents and you wanted
to draw a square. Well, you would realize that if there was a patent
on a bottom edge, it would prohibit your square. You could put “bottom
edge” on the list of all ideas implemented in your drawing. But you
@@ -161,42 +163,54 @@ might not realize that somebody else with a patent on
bottom corners
could sue you easily also, because he could take your drawing and turn
it by 45 degrees. And now your square is like this, and it has a
bottom corner.
-</p>
-<p>So you couldn’t make a list of all the ideas which, if patented, could
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ So you couldn’t make a list of all the ideas which, if patented, could
prohibit your program.
-</p>
-<p>What you might try to do is find out all the ideas that are
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ What you might try to do is find out all the ideas that are
patented that might be in your program. Now you can’t do that
actually, because patent applications are kept secret for at least
18 months; and the result is the Patent Office could be
considering now whether to issue a patent, and they won’t tell you.
And this is not just an academic, theoretical possibility.
-</p>
-<a name="index-Compress"></a>
-<p>For instance, in 1984 the Compress program was written, a program for
-compressing files using the
-<a
name="index-LZW-_0028Lempel_002dZiv_002dWelch_0029-data-compression-algorithm-_0028see-also-patents_0029-2"></a>
-<a name="index-patents_002c-LZW-data-compression-algorithm-1"></a>
-data compression algorithm, and at
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-Compress">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ For instance, in 1984 the Compress program was written, a program for
+compressing files using the
+ <a
name="index-LZW-_0028Lempel_002dZiv_002dWelch_0029-data-compression-algorithm-_0028see-also-patents_0029-2">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-patents_002c-LZW-data-compression-algorithm-1">
+ </a>
+ data compression algorithm, and at
that time there was no patent on that algorithm for compressing
files. The author got the algorithm from an article in a journal. That
was when we thought that the purpose of computer science journals was
to publish algorithms so people could use them.
-</p>
-<p>He wrote this program, he released it, and in 1985 a patent was issued
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ He wrote this program, he released it, and in 1985 a patent was issued
on that algorithm. But the patent holder was cunning and didn’t
immediately go around telling people to stop using it. The patent
holder figured, “Let’s let everybody dig their grave deeper.” A few
years later they started threatening people; it became clear we
couldn’t use Compress, so I asked for people to suggest other
algorithms we could use for compressing files.
-</p>
-<p>And somebody wrote and said, “I developed another data compression
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And somebody wrote and said, “I developed another data compression
algorithm that works better, I’ve written a program, I’d like to give
it to you.” So we got ready to release it, and a week before it was
-ready to be released, I read in the
-<a name="index-New-York-Times-1"></a>
-<cite>New York Times</cite> weekly patent
+ready to be released, I read in the
+ <a name="index-New-York-Times-1">
+ </a>
+ <cite>
+ New York Times
+ </cite>
+ weekly patent
column, which I rarely saw—it’s a couple of times a year I might see
it—but just by luck I saw that someone had gotten a patent for
“inventing a new method of compressing data.” And so I said we had
@@ -204,26 +218,31 @@ better look at this, and sure enough it covered the
program we were
about to release. But it could have been worse: the patent could have
been issued a year later, or two years later, or three years later, or
five years later.
-</p>
-<a name="index-gzip-1"></a>
-<p>Anyway, someone else came up with another, even better compression
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-gzip-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Anyway, someone else came up with another, even better compression
algorithm, which was used in the program gzip, and just about
everybody who wanted to compress files switched to gzip, so it sounds
like a happy ending. But you’ll hear more later. It’s not entirely
so happy.
-</p>
-<p>So, you can’t find out about the patents that are being considered
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ So, you can’t find out about the patents that are being considered
even though they may prohibit your work once they come out, but you
can find out about the already issued patents. They’re all published
by the Patent Office. The problem is you can’t read them all, because
there are too many of them.
-</p>
-<p>In the US I believe there are hundreds of thousands of
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ In the US I believe there are hundreds of thousands of
software patents; keeping track of them would be a tremendous job. So
you’re going to have to search for relevant patents. And you’ll find a
lot of relevant patents, but you won’t necessarily find them all.
-</p>
-<p>For instance, in the 80s and 90s, there was a patent on “natural order
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ For instance, in the 80s and 90s, there was a patent on “natural order
recalculation” in spreadsheets. Somebody once asked me for a copy of
it, so I looked in our computer file which lists the patent numbers.
And then I pulled out the drawer to get the paper copy of this patent
@@ -238,91 +257,109 @@ It didn’t use the term “spreadsheet.” In fact, what the
patent
prohibited was dozens of different ways of implementing topological
sort—all the ways they could think of. But I don’t think it used the
term “topological sort.”
-</p>
-<p>So if you were writing a spreadsheet and you tried to find relevant
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ So if you were writing a spreadsheet and you tried to find relevant
patents by searching, you might have found a lot of patents. But you
wouldn’t have found this one until you told somebody, “Oh, I’m working
on a spreadsheet,” and he said, “Oh, did you know those other
companies that are making spreadsheets are getting sued?” Then you
would have found out.
-</p>
-<p>Well, you can’t find all the patents by searching, but you can find a
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Well, you can’t find all the patents by searching, but you can find a
lot of them. And then you’ve got to figure out what they mean, which
is hard, because patents are written in tortuous legal language which
is very hard to understand the real meaning of. So you’re going to
have to spend a lot of time talking with an expensive lawyer
explaining what you want to do in order to find out from the lawyer
whether you’re allowed to do it.
-</p>
-<a name="index-Heckel_002c-Paul"></a>
-<p>Even the patent holders often can’t recognize just what their patents
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-Heckel_002c-Paul">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Even the patent holders often can’t recognize just what their patents
mean. For instance, there’s somebody named Paul Heckel who released a
program for displaying a lot of data on a small screen, and based on a
couple of the ideas in that program he got a couple of patents.
-</p>
-<p>I once tried to find a simple way to describe what claim 1 of one of
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ I once tried to find a simple way to describe what claim 1 of one of
those patents covered. I found that I couldn’t find any simpler way
of saying it than what was in the patent itself; and that sentence, I
couldn’t manage to keep it all in my mind at once, no matter how hard
I tried.
-</p>
-<a name="index-HyperCard"></a>
-<p>And Heckel couldn’t follow it either, because when he saw HyperCard,
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-HyperCard">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ And Heckel couldn’t follow it either, because when he saw HyperCard,
all he noticed was it was nothing like his program. It didn’t occur to
him that the way his patent was written it might prohibit HyperCard;
-but his lawyer had that idea, so he threatened
-<a name="index-Apple-_0028see-also-DRM_0029-1"></a>
-Apple. And then he
+but his lawyer had that idea, so he threatened
+ <a name="index-Apple-_0028see-also-DRM_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ Apple. And then he
threatened Apple’s customers, and eventually Apple made a settlement
with him which is secret, so we don’t know who really won. And this is
just an illustration of how hard it is for anybody to understand what
a patent does or doesn’t prohibit.
-</p>
-<p>In fact, I once gave this speech and Heckel was in the audience. And
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ In fact, I once gave this speech and Heckel was in the audience. And
at this point he jumped up and said, “That’s not true, I just didn’t
know the scope of my protection.” And I said, “Yeah, that’s what I
said,” at which point he sat down and that was the end of my
experience being heckled by Heckel. If I had said no, he probably
would have found a way to argue with me.
-</p>
-<p>Anyway, after a long, expensive conversation with a lawyer, the
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Anyway, after a long, expensive conversation with a lawyer, the
lawyer will give you an answer like this:
-</p>
-<blockquote class="smallquotation">
-<p>If you do something in this area, you’re almost certain to lose a
+ </p>
+ <blockquote class="smallquotation">
+ <p>
+ If you do something in this area, you’re almost certain to lose a
lawsuit; if you do something in this area, there’s a considerable
chance of losing a lawsuit; and if you really want to be safe you’ve
got to stay out of this area. But there’s a sizeable element of chance
in the outcome of any lawsuit.
-</p>
-</blockquote>
-
-<p>So now that you have clear, predictable rules for doing business, what
+ </p>
+ </blockquote>
+ <p>
+ So now that you have clear, predictable rules for doing business, what
are you actually going to do? Well, there are three things that you
could do to deal with the issue of any particular patent. One is to
avoid it, another is to get a license for it, and the third is to
invalidate it. So I’ll talk about these one by one.
-</p>
-<p>First, there’s the possibility of avoiding the patent, which means,
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ First, there’s the possibility of avoiding the patent, which means,
don’t implement what it prohibits. Of course, if it’s hard to tell
what it prohibits, it might be hard to tell what would suffice to
avoid it.
-</p>
-<a name="index-Sun-Microsystems-1"></a>
-<a name="index-Kodak"></a>
-<p>A couple of years ago Kodak sued Sun [for] using a patent for something
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-Sun-Microsystems-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Kodak">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ A couple of years ago Kodak sued Sun [for] using a patent for something
having to do with object-oriented programming, and Sun didn’t think it
was infringing that patent. But the court decided it was; and when
other people look at that patent they haven’t the faintest idea
whether that decision was right or not. No one can tell what that
patent does or doesn’t cover, but Sun had to pay hundreds of millions
of dollars because of violating a completely incomprehensible law.
-</p>
-<p>Sometimes you can tell what you need to avoid, and sometimes what
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Sometimes you can tell what you need to avoid, and sometimes what
you need to avoid is an algorithm.
-</p>
-<a name="index-FFT-_0028fast-Fourier-transform_0029"></a>
-<p>For instance, I saw a patent for something like the fast Fourier
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-FFT-_0028fast-Fourier-transform_0029">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ For instance, I saw a patent for something like the fast Fourier
transform, but it ran twice as fast. Well, if the ordinary FFT is fast
enough for your application then that’s an easy way to avoid this
other one. And most of the time that would work. Once in a while you
@@ -331,11 +368,13 @@ and it’s just barely fast enough using the faster
algorithm. And then
you can’t avoid it, although maybe you could wait a couple of years
for a faster computer. But that’s going to be rare. Most of the time
that patent will to be easy to avoid.
-</p>
-<a
name="index-LZW-_0028Lempel_002dZiv_002dWelch_0029-data-compression-algorithm-_0028see-also-patents_0029-3"></a>
-<a name="index-patents_002c-LZW-data-compression-algorithm-2"></a>
-
-<p>On the other hand, a patent on an algorithm may be impossible to
+ </p>
+ <a
name="index-LZW-_0028Lempel_002dZiv_002dWelch_0029-data-compression-algorithm-_0028see-also-patents_0029-3">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-patents_002c-LZW-data-compression-algorithm-2">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ On the other hand, a patent on an algorithm may be impossible to
avoid. Consider the LZW data compression algorithm. Well, as I
explained, we found a better data compression algorithm, and everybody
who wanted to compress files switched to the program gzip which used
@@ -343,9 +382,11 @@ the better algorithm. And the reason is, if you just want
to compress
the file and uncompress it later, you can tell people to use this
program to uncompress it; then you can use any program with any
algorithm, and you only care how well it works.
-</p>
-<a name="index-PostScript-language"></a>
-<p>But LZW is used for other things, too; for instance the PostScript
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-PostScript-language">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ But LZW is used for other things, too; for instance the PostScript
language specifies operators for LZW compression and LZW
uncompression. It’s no use having another, better algorithm because
it makes a different format of data. They’re not interoperable. If you
@@ -353,8 +394,9 @@ compress it with the gzip algorithm, you won’t be able to
uncompress
it using LZW. So no matter how good your other algorithm is, and no
matter what it is, it just doesn’t enable you to implement PostScript
according to the specs.
-</p>
-<p>But I noticed that users rarely ask their printers to compress
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ But I noticed that users rarely ask their printers to compress
things. Generally the only thing they want their printers to do is to
uncompress; and I also noticed that both of the patents on the LZW
algorithm were written in such a way that if your system can only
@@ -366,10 +408,13 @@ uncompression for LZW, we would be safe. And although it
would not
satisfy the specification, it would please the users sufficiently; it
would do what they actually needed. So that’s how we barely squeaked
by avoiding the two patents.
-</p>
-<a name="index-GIF-1"></a>
-<a name="index-PNG"></a>
-<p>Now there is gif format, for images. That uses the LZW algorithm
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-GIF-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-PNG">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Now there is gif format, for images. That uses the LZW algorithm
also. It didn’t take long for people to define another image format,
called png, which stands for “Png’s Not Gif.” I think it uses the
gzip algorithm. And we started saying to people, “Don’t use gif
@@ -377,9 +422,11 @@ format, it’s dangerous. Switch to png.” And the users
said, “Well,
maybe some day, but the browsers don’t implement it yet,” and the
browser developers said, “We may implement it someday, but there’s not
much demand from users.”
-<a name="index-gzip-2"></a>
-</p>
-<p>Well, it’s pretty obvious what’s going on—gif was a de facto
+ <a name="index-gzip-2">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Well, it’s pretty obvious what’s going on—gif was a de facto
standard. In effect, asking people to switch to a different format,
instead of their de facto standard, is like asking everyone in New
Zealand to speak Hungarian. People will say, “Well, yeah, I’ll learn to
@@ -388,27 +435,32 @@ asking people to stop using gif, even though one of those
patent
holders was going around to operators of web sites,
threatening to sue them unless they could prove that all of the gifs on
the site were made with authorized, licensed software.
-</p>
-<a name="index-JPEG"></a>
-<p>So gif was a dangerous trap for a large part of our community. We
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-JPEG">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ So gif was a dangerous trap for a large part of our community. We
thought we had an alternative to gif format, namely jpeg, but then
somebody said, “I was just looking through my portfolio of patents”—I
think it was somebody that just bought patents and used them to
threaten people—and he said, “and I found that one of them covers jpeg
format.”
-</p>
-<p>Well, jpeg was not a de facto standard, it’s an official standard,
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Well, jpeg was not a de facto standard, it’s an official standard,
issued by a standards committee; and the committee had a lawyer too.
Their lawyer said he didn’t think that this patent actually covered
jpeg format.
-</p>
-<p>So who’s right? Well, this patent holder sued a bunch of companies,
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ So who’s right? Well, this patent holder sued a bunch of companies,
and if there was a decision, it would have said who was right. But I
haven’t heard about a decision; I’m not sure if there ever was one. I
think they settled, and the settlement is almost certainly secret,
which means that it didn’t tell us anything about who’s right.
-</p>
-<p>These are fairly lightweight cases: one patent on jpeg, two patents
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ These are fairly lightweight cases: one patent on jpeg, two patents
on the LZW algorithm used in gif. Now you might wonder how come there
are two patents on the same algorithm? It’s not supposed to happen,
but it did. And the reason is that the patent examiners can’t possibly
@@ -416,11 +468,13 @@ take the time to study every pair of things they might
need to study
and compare, because they’re not allowed to take that much time. And
because algorithms are just mathematics, there’s no way you can narrow
down which applications and patents you need to compare.
-</p>
-<a name="index-patents_002c-LZW-data-compression-algorithm-3"></a>
-<a
name="index-LZW-_0028Lempel_002dZiv_002dWelch_0029-data-compression-algorithm-_0028see-also-patents_0029-4"></a>
-
-<p>You see, in physical engineering fields, they can use the physical
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-patents_002c-LZW-data-compression-algorithm-3">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-LZW-_0028Lempel_002dZiv_002dWelch_0029-data-compression-algorithm-_0028see-also-patents_0029-4">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ You see, in physical engineering fields, they can use the physical
nature of what’s going on to narrow things down. For instance, in
chemical engineering, they can say, “What are the substances going in?
What are the substances coming out?” If two different [patent]
@@ -430,68 +484,86 @@ represented in ways that can look very different, and
until you study
them both together, you don’t realize they’re talking about the same
thing. And, because of this, it’s quite common to see the same thing
get patented multiple times [in software].
-</p>
-<p>Remember that program that was killed by a patent before we released
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Remember that program that was killed by a patent before we released
it? Well, that algorithm got patented twice also. In one little field
we’ve seen it happen in two cases that we ran into—the same algorithm
being patented twice. Well, I think my explanation tells you why that
happens.
-</p>
-<p>But one or two patents is a lightweight case. What about
-<a name="index-MPEG_002d2-1"></a>
-mpeg2, the
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ But one or two patents is a lightweight case. What about
+ <a name="index-MPEG_002d2-1">
+ </a>
+ mpeg2, the
video format? I saw a list of over 70 patents covering that, and the
negotiations to arrange a way for somebody to license all those
patents took longer than developing the standard itself. The jpeg
committee wanted to develop a follow-on standard, and they gave
up. They said there were too many patents; there was no way to do it.
-<a name="index-JPEG-1"></a>
-</p>
-<p>Sometimes it’s a feature that’s patented, and the only way to avoid that
+ <a name="index-JPEG-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Sometimes it’s a feature that’s patented, and the only way to avoid that
patent is not to implement that feature. For instance, the users of
-the word processor
-<a name="index-Xywrite"></a>
-Xywrite once got a downgrade in the mail, which
+the word processor
+ <a name="index-Xywrite">
+ </a>
+ Xywrite once got a downgrade in the mail, which
removed a feature. The feature was that you could define a list of
-abbreviations. For instance, if you define
-<a name="index-abbreviations_002c-patents-on"></a>
-<a name="index-patents_002c-on-abbreviations"></a>
-“exp” as an abbreviation
+abbreviations. For instance, if you define
+ <a name="index-abbreviations_002c-patents-on">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-patents_002c-on-abbreviations">
+ </a>
+ “exp” as an abbreviation
for “experiment,” then if you type “exp-space” or “exp-comma,” the “exp”
would change automatically to “experiment.”
-</p>
-<p>Then somebody who had a patent on this feature threatened them, and
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Then somebody who had a patent on this feature threatened them, and
they concluded that the only thing they could do was to take the
feature out. And so they sent all the users a downgrade.
-</p>
-<p>But they also contacted me, because my
-<a name="index-Emacs_002c-GNU-7"></a>
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Emacs-7"></a>
-Emacs editor had a feature like
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ But they also contacted me, because my
+ <a name="index-Emacs_002c-GNU-7">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Emacs-7">
+ </a>
+ Emacs editor had a feature like
that starting from the late 70s. And it was described in the Emacs
manual, so they thought I might be able to help them invalidate that
patent. Well, I’m happy to know I’ve had at least one patentable idea
in my life, but I’m unhappy that someone else patented it.
-</p>
-<p>Fortunately, in fact, that patent was eventually invalidated, and
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Fortunately, in fact, that patent was eventually invalidated, and
partly on the strength of the fact that I had published using it
earlier. But in the meantime they had had to remove this feature.
-</p>
-<p>Now, to remove one or two features may not be a disaster. But when
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Now, to remove one or two features may not be a disaster. But when
you have to remove 50 features, you could do it, but people are likely
to say, “This program’s no good; it’s missing all the features I want.”
So it may not be a solution. And sometimes a patent is so broad that
it wipes out an entire field, like the patent on public-key
encryption, which in fact put public-key encryption basically off
limits for about ten years.
-</p>
-<p>So that’s the option of avoiding the patent—often possible, but
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ So that’s the option of avoiding the patent—often possible, but
sometimes not, and there’s a limit to how many patents you can avoid.
-</p>
-<p>What about the next possibility, of getting a license for the patent?
-</p>
-<a name="index-games_002c-patents-and"></a>
-<p>Well, the patent holder may not offer you a license. It’s entirely up
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ What about the next possibility, of getting a license for the patent?
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-games_002c-patents-and">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Well, the patent holder may not offer you a license. It’s entirely up
to him. He could say, “I just want to shut you down.” I once got a
letter from somebody whose family business was making casino games,
which were of course computerized, and he had been threatened by
@@ -499,9 +571,11 @@ a patent holder who wanted to make his business shut down.
He sent me
the patent. Claim 1 was something like “a network with a multiplicity
of computers, in which each computer supports a multiplicity of games,
and allows a multiplicity of game sessions at the same time.”
-</p>
-<a name="index-universities-4"></a>
-<p>Now, I’m sure in the 1980s there was a university that set up a room
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-universities-4">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Now, I’m sure in the 1980s there was a university that set up a room
with a network of workstations, and each workstation had some kind of
windowing facility. All they had to do was to install multiple games
and it would be possible to display multiple game sessions at
@@ -511,48 +585,71 @@ interested in publishing an article about doing it, but
it was worth
patenting it. If it had occurred to you that you could get a monopoly
on this trivial thing, then you could shut down your competitors with
it.
-<a name="index-games_002c-patents-and-1"></a>
-</p>
-<p>But why does the Patent Office issue so many patents that seem absurd
+ <a name="index-games_002c-patents-and-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ But why does the Patent Office issue so many patents that seem absurd
and trivial to us?
-</p>
-<p>It’s not because the patent examiners are stupid, it’s because they’re
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ It’s not because the patent examiners are stupid, it’s because they’re
following a system, and the system has rules, and the rules lead to
this result.
-</p>
-<p>You see, if somebody has made a machine that does something once, and
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ You see, if somebody has made a machine that does something once, and
somebody else designs a machine that will do the same thing, but N
-times, for us that’s a <tt>for</tt>-loop, but for the Patent Office that’s an
+times, for us that’s a
+ <tt>
+ for
+ </tt>
+ -loop, but for the Patent Office that’s an
invention. If there are machines that can do A, and there are
machines that can do B, and somebody designs a machine that can do A
-or B, for us that’s an <tt>if-then-else</tt> statement, but for the Patent
+or B, for us that’s an
+ <tt>
+ if-then-else
+ </tt>
+ statement, but for the Patent
Office that’s an invention. So they have very low standards, and they
follow those standards; and the result is patents that look absurd and
trivial to us. Whether they’re legally valid I can’t say. But every
programmer who sees them laughs.
-</p>
-<p>In any case, I was unable to suggest anything he could do to help
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ In any case, I was unable to suggest anything he could do to help
himself, and he had to shut down his business. But most patent holders
will offer you a license. It’s likely to be rather expensive.
-</p>
-<p>But there are some software developers that find it particularly easy
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ But there are some software developers that find it particularly easy
to get licenses, most of the time. Those are the megacorporations. In
any field the megacorporations generally own about half the patents,
and they cross-license each other, and they can make anybody else
cross-license if he’s really producing anything. The result is that
they end up painlessly with licenses for almost all the patents.
-</p>
-<a name="index-IBM"></a>
-<a name="index-patents_002c-IBM-and"></a>
-<a name="index-Think-magazine"></a>
-<p>IBM wrote an article in its house magazine, <cite>Think</cite> magazine—I
think
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-IBM">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-patents_002c-IBM-and">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Think-magazine">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ IBM wrote an article in its house magazine,
+ <cite>
+ Think
+ </cite>
+ magazine—I think
it’s issue 5, 1990—about the benefit IBM got from its almost 9,000 US
patents at the time (now it’s up to 45,000 or more). They said that
one of the benefits was that they collected money, but the main
benefit, which they said was perhaps an order of magnitude greater,
was “getting access to the patents of others,” namely cross-licensing.
-</p>
-<p>What this means is since IBM, with so many patents, can make almost
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ What this means is since IBM, with so many patents, can make almost
everybody give them a cross-license, IBM avoids almost all the grief
that the patent system would have inflicted on anybody else. So that’s
why IBM wants software patents. That’s why the megacorporations in
@@ -562,25 +659,29 @@ mountain peak. And all the rest of us will be down here,
and there’s
no way we can get up there. You know, if you’re a genius, you might
start up a small company and get some patents, but you’ll never get
into IBM’s league, no matter what you do.
-</p>
-<p>Now a lot of companies tell their employees, “Get us patents so we can
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Now a lot of companies tell their employees, “Get us patents so we can
defend ourselves” and they mean, “use them to try to get
cross-licensing,” but it just doesn’t work well. It’s not an effective
strategy if you’ve got a small number of patents.
-</p>
-<p>Suppose you’ve got three patents. One points there, one points there,
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Suppose you’ve got three patents. One points there, one points there,
and one points there, and somebody over there points a patent at you.
Well, your three patents don’t help you at all, because none of them
points at him. On the other hand, sooner or later, somebody in the
company is going to notice that this patent is actually pointing at
some people, and [the company] could threaten them and squeeze money
out of them—never mind that those people didn’t attack this company.
-</p>
-<p>So if your employer says to you, “We need some patents to defend
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ So if your employer says to you, “We need some patents to defend
ourselves, so help us get patents,” I recommend this response:
-</p>
-<blockquote class="smallquotation">
-<p>Boss, I trust you and I’m sure you would only use those patents to
+ </p>
+ <blockquote class="smallquotation">
+ <p>
+ Boss, I trust you and I’m sure you would only use those patents to
defend the company if it’s attacked. But I don’t know who’s going to
be the CEO of this company in five years. For all I know, it might get
acquired by Microsoft. So I really can’t trust the company’s word to
@@ -589,23 +690,26 @@ put it in writing that any patents I provide for the
company will only
be used for self-defense and collective security, and not for
repression, and then I’ll be able to get patents for the company with
a clean conscience.
-</p>
-</blockquote>
-
-<p>It would be most interesting to raise this not just in private with
+ </p>
+ </blockquote>
+ <p>
+ It would be most interesting to raise this not just in private with
your boss, but also on the company’s discussion list.
-</p>
-<p>The other thing that could happen is that the company could fail and
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The other thing that could happen is that the company could fail and
its assets could be auctioned off, including the patents; and the
patents will be bought by someone who means to use them to do
something nasty.
-</p>
-<p>This cross-licensing practice is very important to understand, because
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ This cross-licensing practice is very important to understand, because
this is what punctures the argument of the software patent advocates
who say that software patents are needed to protect the starving
genius. They give you a scenario which is a series of unlikelihoods.
-</p>
-<p>So let’s look at it. According to this scenario, there’s a brilliant
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ So let’s look at it. According to this scenario, there’s a brilliant
designer of whatever, who’s been working for years by himself in his
attic coming up with a better way to do whatever it is. And now that
it’s ready, he wants to start a business and mass-produce this thing;
@@ -613,23 +717,27 @@ and because his idea is so good his company will
inevitably succeed—
except for one thing: the big companies will compete with him and take
all his market the away. And because of this, his business will almost
certainly fail, and then he will starve.
-</p>
-<p>Well, let’s look at all the unlikely assumptions here.
-</p>
-<p>First of all, that he comes up with this idea working by
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Well, let’s look at all the unlikely assumptions here.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ First of all, that he comes up with this idea working by
himself. That’s not very likely. In a high-tech field, most progress
is made by people working in a field, doing things and talking with
people in the field. But I wouldn’t say it’s impossible, not that one
thing by itself.
-</p>
-<p>But anyway the next supposition is that he’s going to start a business
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ But anyway the next supposition is that he’s going to start a business
and that it’s going to succeed. Well, just because he’s a brilliant
engineer doesn’t mean that he’s any good at running a business. Most
new businesses fail; more than 95 percent of them, I think, fail within a few
years. So that’s probably what’s going to happen to him, no matter
what.
-</p>
-<p>Ok, let’s assume that in addition to being a brilliant engineer who
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Ok, let’s assume that in addition to being a brilliant engineer who
came up with something great by himself, he’s also talented at running
businesses. If he has a knack for running businesses, then maybe his
business won’t fail. After all, not all new businesses fail, there are
@@ -640,19 +748,23 @@ chance of succeeding. He might succeed. But let’s suppose
it fails
anyway. If he’s so brilliant and has a knack for running businesses,
I’m sure he won’t starve, because somebody will want to give him a
job.
-</p>
-<p>So a series of unlikelihoods—it’s not a very plausible scenario. But
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ So a series of unlikelihoods—it’s not a very plausible scenario. But
let’s look at it anyway.
-</p>
-<p>Because where they go from there is to say the patent system will
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Because where they go from there is to say the patent system will
“protect” our starving genius, because he can get a patent on this
technique. And then when IBM wants to compete with him, he says,
“IBM, you can’t compete with me, because I’ve got this patent,” and
IBM says, “Oh, no, not again!”
-</p>
-<p>Well, here’s what really happens.
-</p>
-<p>IBM says, “Oh, how nice, you have a patent. Well, we have this patent,
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Well, here’s what really happens.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ IBM says, “Oh, how nice, you have a patent. Well, we have this patent,
and this patent, and this patent, and this patent, and this patent,
all of which cover other ideas implemented in your product, and if you
think you can fight us on all those, we’ll pull out some more. So
@@ -665,8 +777,9 @@ meaning IBM would be free to compete with him just as if
there were no
patents, which means that the supposed benefit that they claim he
would get by having this patent is not real. He won’t get this
benefit.
-</p>
-<p>The patent might “protect” him from competition from you or me, but
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The patent might “protect” him from competition from you or me, but
not from IBM—not from the very megacorporations which the scenario
says are the threat to him. You know in advance that there’s got to
be a flaw in this reasoning when people who are lobbyists for
@@ -674,13 +787,15 @@ megacorporations recommend a policy supposedly because
it’s going to
protect their small competitors from them. If it really were going to
do that, they wouldn’t be in favor of it. But this explains why
[software patents] won’t do it.
-</p>
-<p>Even IBM can’t always do this, because there are companies that we
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Even IBM can’t always do this, because there are companies that we
refer to as patent trolls or patent parasites, and their only business
is using patents to squeeze money out of people who really make
something.
-</p>
-<p>Patent lawyers tell us that it’s really wonderful to have patents in
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Patent lawyers tell us that it’s really wonderful to have patents in
your field, but they don’t have patents in their field.
There are no patents on how to send or write a threatening letter, no
patents on how to file a lawsuit, and no patents on how to persuade a
@@ -691,170 +806,200 @@ with it.” IBM and the other megacorporations figure
that the general
dominion over all activity that they get from their patents is good
for them, and paying off the trolls they can live with. So that’s why
they want software patents.
-<a name="index-IBM-1"></a>
-<a name="index-patents_002c-IBM-and-1"></a>
-</p>
-<p>There are also certain software developers who find it particularly
+ <a name="index-IBM-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-patents_002c-IBM-and-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ There are also certain software developers who find it particularly
difficult to get a patent license, and those are the developers of
free software. The reason is that the usual patent license has
conditions we can’t possibly fulfill, because usual patent licenses
demand a payment per copy. But when software gives users the freedom
to distribute and make more copies, we have no way to count the copies
that exist.
-</p>
-<p>If someone offered me a patent license for a payment of one-millionth
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ If someone offered me a patent license for a payment of one-millionth
of a dollar per copy, the total amount of money I’d have to pay maybe
is in my pocket now. Maybe it’s $50, but I don’t know if it’s
$50, or $49, or what, because there’s no way I can count the
copies that people have made.
-</p>
-<p>A patent holder doesn’t have to demand a payment per copy; a patent
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ A patent holder doesn’t have to demand a payment per copy; a patent
holder could offer you a license for a single lump sum, but those lump
sums tend to be big, like US$100,000.
-</p>
-<p>And the reason that we’ve been able to develop so much
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And the reason that we’ve been able to develop so much
freedom-respecting software is [that] we can develop software without
money, but we can’t pay a lot of money without money. If we’re forced
to pay for the privilege of writing software for the public, we won’t
be able to do it very much.
-</p>
-<p>That’s the possibility of getting a license for the patent. The other
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ That’s the possibility of getting a license for the patent. The other
possibility is to invalidate the patent. If the country considers
software patents to be basically valid, and allowed, the only question
is whether that particular patent meets the criteria. It’s only
useful to go to court if you’ve got an argument to make that might
prevail.
-</p>
-<p>What would that argument be? You have to find evidence that, years
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ What would that argument be? You have to find evidence that, years
ago, before the patent was applied for, people knew about the same
idea. And you’d have to find things today that demonstrate that they
knew about it publicly at that time. So the dice were cast years ago,
and if they came up favorably for you, and if you can prove that fact
today, then you have an argument to use to try to invalidate the
patent. And it might work.
-</p>
-<p>It might cost you a lot of money to go through this case, and as a
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ It might cost you a lot of money to go through this case, and as a
result, a probably invalid patent is a very frightening weapon to be
threatened with if you don’t have a lot of money. There are people who
can’t afford to defend their rights—lots of them. The ones who can
afford it are the exception.
-</p>
-<p>These are the three things that you might be able to do about each
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ These are the three things that you might be able to do about each
patent that prohibits something in your program. The thing is, whether
each one is possible depends on different details of the
circumstances, so some of the time, none of them is possible; and when
that happens, your project is dead.
-</p>
-<p>But lawyers in most countries tell us, “Don’t try to find the patents
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ But lawyers in most countries tell us, “Don’t try to find the patents
in advance,” and the reason is that the penalty for infringement is
bigger if you knew about the patent. So what they tell you is “Keep
your eyes shut. Don’t try to find out about the patents, just go
blindly taking your design decisions, and hope.”
-</p>
-<p>And of course, with each single design decision, you probably don’t
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And of course, with each single design decision, you probably don’t
step on a patent. Probably nothing happens to you. But there are so many
steps you have to take to get across the minefield, it’s very unlikely
you will get through safely. And of course, the patent holders don’t
all show up at the same time, so you don’t know how many there are
going to be.
-</p>
-<p>The patent holder of the natural order recalculation patent was
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The patent holder of the natural order recalculation patent was
demanding 5 percent of the gross sales of every spreadsheet. You could
imagine paying for a few such licenses, but what happens when patent
holder number 20 comes along, and wants you to pay out the last
remaining 5 percent? And then what happens when patent holder number 21 comes
along?
-</p>
-<p>People in business say that this scenario is amusing but absurd,
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ People in business say that this scenario is amusing but absurd,
because your business would fail long before you got there. They told
me that two or three such licenses would make your business fail. So
you’d never get to 20. They show up one by one, so you never know how
many more there are going to be.
-</p>
-<p>Software patents are a mess. They’re a mess for software developers,
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Software patents are a mess. They’re a mess for software developers,
but in addition they’re a restriction on every computer user because
software patents restrict what you can do on your computer.
-</p>
-<p>This is very different from patents, for instance, on automobile
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ This is very different from patents, for instance, on automobile
engines. These only restrict companies that make cars; they don’t
restrict you and me. But software patents do restrict you and me, and
everybody who uses computers. So we can’t think of them in purely
economic terms; we can’t judge this issue purely in economic
terms. There’s something more important at stake.
-</p>
-<a name="index-patents_002c-economically-self_002ddefeating"></a>
-<p>But even in economic terms, the system is self-defeating, because its
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-patents_002c-economically-self_002ddefeating">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ But even in economic terms, the system is self-defeating, because its
purpose is supposed to be to promote progress. Supposedly by creating
this artificial incentive for people to publish ideas, it’s going to
help the field progress. But all it does is the exact opposite,
because the big job in software is not coming up with ideas, it’s
implementing thousands of ideas together in one program. And software
patents obstruct that, so they’re economically self-defeating.
-</p>
-<p>And there’s even economic research showing that this is so—showing
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And there’s even economic research showing that this is so—showing
how in a field with a lot of incremental innovation, a patent system
can actually reduce investment in R & D. And of course, it also
obstructs development in other ways. So even if we ignore the
injustice of software patents, even if we were to look at it in the
narrow economic terms that are usually proposed, it’s still harmful.
-</p>
-<p>People sometimes respond by saying that “People in other fields have
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ People sometimes respond by saying that “People in other fields have
been living with patents for decades, and they’ve gotten used to it,
so why should you be an exception?”
-</p>
-<p>Now, that question has an absurd assumption. It’s like saying, “Other
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Now, that question has an absurd assumption. It’s like saying, “Other
people get cancer, why shouldn’t you?” I think every time someone
doesn’t get cancer, that’s good, regardless of what happened to the
others. That question is absurd because of its presupposition that
somehow we all have a duty to suffer the harm done by patents.
-</p>
-<p>But there is a sensible question buried inside it, and that sensible
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ But there is a sensible question buried inside it, and that sensible
question is “What differences are there between various fields that
might affect what is good or bad patent policy in those fields?”
-</p>
-<p>There is an important basic difference between fields in regard to how
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ There is an important basic difference between fields in regard to how
many patents are likely to prohibit or cover parts of any one
product.
-</p>
-<p>Now we have a naive idea in our minds which I’m trying to get rid of,
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Now we have a naive idea in our minds which I’m trying to get rid of,
because it’s not true. And it’s that on any one product there is one
patent, and that patent covers the overall design of that product. So
if you design a new product, it can’t be patented already, and you
will have an opportunity to get “the patent” on that product.
-</p>
-<p>That’s not how things work. In the 1800s, maybe they did, but not
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ That’s not how things work. In the 1800s, maybe they did, but not
now. In fact, fields fall on a spectrum of how many patents [there
are] per product. The beginning of the spectrum is one, but no field
is like that today; fields are at various places on this spectrum.
-</p>
-<p>The field that’s closest to that is pharmaceuticals. A few decades
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The field that’s closest to that is pharmaceuticals. A few decades
ago, there really was one patent per pharmaceutical, at least at any
time, because the patent covered the entire chemical formula of that
one particular substance. Back then, if you developed a new drug, you
could be sure it wasn’t already patented by somebody else and you
could get the one patent on that drug.
-</p>
-<p>But that’s not how it works now. Now there are broader patents, so
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ But that’s not how it works now. Now there are broader patents, so
now you could develop a new drug, and you’re not allowed to make it
because somebody has a broader patent which covers it already.
-</p>
-<p>And there might even be a few such patents covering your new drug
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And there might even be a few such patents covering your new drug
simultaneously, but there won’t be hundreds. The reason is, our
ability to do biochemical engineering is so limited that nobody knows
how to combine so many ideas to make something that’s useful in
medicine. If you can combine a couple of them you’re doing pretty
well at our level of knowledge. But other fields involve combining
more ideas to make one thing.
-</p>
-<p>At the other end of the spectrum is software, where we can combine
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ At the other end of the spectrum is software, where we can combine
more ideas into one usable design than anybody else, because our field
is basically easier than all other fields. I’m presuming that the
intelligence of people in our field is the same as that of people in
physical engineering. It’s not that we’re fundamentally better than
they are; it’s that our field is fundamentally easier, because we’re
working with mathematics.
-</p>
-<p>A program is made out of mathematical components, which have a
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ A program is made out of mathematical components, which have a
definition, whereas physical objects don’t have a definition. The
matter does what it does, so through the perversity of matter, your
design may not work the way it “should” have worked. And that’s just
@@ -862,72 +1007,134 @@ tough. You can’t say that the matter has a bug in it,
and the
physical universe should get fixed. [Whereas] we [programmers] can
make a castle that rests on a mathematically thin line, and it stays
up because nothing weighs anything.
-</p>
-<p>There’re so many complications you have to cope with in physical
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ There’re so many complications you have to cope with in physical
engineering that we don’t have to worry about.
-</p>
-<p>For instance, when I put an <code>if</code>-statement inside of a
<code>while</code>-loop,
-</p>
-<ul><li>
-I don’t have to worry that if this <code>while</code>-loop repeats at the wrong
- rate, the <code>if</code>-statement might start to vibrate and it might
resonate
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ For instance, when I put an
+ <code>
+ if
+ </code>
+ -statement inside of a
+ <code>
+ while
+ </code>
+ -loop,
+ </p>
+ <ul>
+ <li>
+ I don’t have to worry that if this
+ <code>
+ while
+ </code>
+ -loop repeats at the wrong
+ rate, the
+ <code>
+ if
+ </code>
+ -statement might start to vibrate and it might resonate
and crack;
-
-</li><li>
-I don’t have to worry that if it resonates much faster—you know,
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ I don’t have to worry that if it resonates much faster—you know,
millions of times per second—that it might generate radio frequency
signals that might induce wrong values in other parts of the
program;
-
-</li><li>
-I don’t have to worry that corrosive fluids from the environment
- might seep in between the <code>if</code>-statement and the
<code>while</code>-statement and
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ I don’t have to worry that corrosive fluids from the environment
+ might seep in between the
+ <code>
+ if
+ </code>
+ -statement and the
+ <code>
+ while
+ </code>
+ -statement and
start eating away at them until the signals don’t pass anymore;
-
-</li><li>
-I don’t have to worry about how the heat generated by my
- <code>if</code>-statement is going to get out through the
<code>while</code>-statement so that
- it doesn’t make the <code>if</code>-statement burn out; and
-
-</li><li>
-I don’t have to worry about how I would take out the broken
- <code>if</code>-statement if it does crack, burn, or corrode, and replace it
with
- another <code>if</code>-statement to make the program run again.
-
-</li></ul><p>For that matter, I don’t have to worry about how I’m going to
insert
-the <code>if</code>-statement inside the <code>while</code>-statement every
time I produce a
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ I don’t have to worry about how the heat generated by my
+ <code>
+ if
+ </code>
+ -statement is going to get out through the
+ <code>
+ while
+ </code>
+ -statement so that
+ it doesn’t make the
+ <code>
+ if
+ </code>
+ -statement burn out; and
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ I don’t have to worry about how I would take out the broken
+ <code>
+ if
+ </code>
+ -statement if it does crack, burn, or corrode, and replace it with
+ another
+ <code>
+ if
+ </code>
+ -statement to make the program run again.
+ </li>
+ </ul>
+ <p>
+ For that matter, I don’t have to worry about how I’m going to insert
+the
+ <code>
+ if
+ </code>
+ -statement inside the
+ <code>
+ while
+ </code>
+ -statement every time I produce a
copy of the program. I don’t have to design a factory to make copies
of my program, because there are various general commands that will
make copies of anything.
-</p>
-<p>If I want to make copies on CD, I just have to write a master; and
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ If I want to make copies on CD, I just have to write a master; and
there’s one program I can [use to] make a master out of anything,
write any data I want. I can make a master CD and write it and send
it off to a factory, and they’ll duplicate whatever I send them. I
don’t have to design a different factory for each thing I want to
duplicate.
-</p>
-<p>Very often with physical engineering you have to do that; you have to
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Very often with physical engineering you have to do that; you have to
design products for manufacturability. Designing the factory may even
be a bigger job than designing the product, and then you may have to
spend millions of dollars to build the factory. So with all of this
trouble, you’re not going to be able to put together so many different
ideas in one product and have it work.
-</p>
-<p>A physical design with a million nonrepeating different design
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ A physical design with a million nonrepeating different design
elements is a gigantic project. A program with a million different
design elements, that’s nothing. It’s a few hundred thousand lines of
code, and a few people will write that in a few years, so it’s not a
big deal. So the result is that the patent system weighs
proportionately heavier on us than it does on people in any other
field who are being held back by the perversity of matter.
-</p>
-<a name="index-Linux-kernel-3"></a>
-<a name="index-kernel_002c-Linux-3"></a>
-<p>A lawyer did a study of one particular large program, namely the
-kernel Linux, which is used together with the
-<a name="index-GNU-_0028see-also-both-software-and-GNU_0029-6"></a>
-GNU operating system
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-Linux-kernel-3">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-kernel_002c-Linux-3">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ A lawyer did a study of one particular large program, namely the
+kernel Linux, which is used together with the
+ <a name="index-GNU-_0028see-also-both-software-and-GNU_0029-6">
+ </a>
+ GNU operating system
that I launched. This was five years ago now; he found 283 different
US patents, each of which appeared to prohibit some computation done
somewhere in the code of Linux. At the time I saw an article saying
@@ -936,19 +1143,26 @@ we can estimate the number of patents that would
prohibit something in
the whole system as being around 100,000. This is a very rough
estimate only, and no more accurate information is available, since
trying to figure it out would be a gigantic task.
-</p>
-<p>Now this lawyer did not publish the list of patents, because that
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Now this lawyer did not publish the list of patents, because that
would have endangered the developers of Linux the kernel, putting them
in a position where the penalties if they were sued would be
greater. He didn’t want to hurt them; he wanted to demonstrate how bad
this problem is, of patent gridlock.
-<a name="index-Linux-kernel-4"></a>
-<a name="index-kernel_002c-Linux-4"></a>
-</p>
-<a name="index-development_002c-patents"></a>
-<a name="index-patents_002c-difference-between-copyrights-and-1"></a>
-<a name="index-copyright_002c-difference-between-patents-and"></a>
-<p>Programmers can understand this immediately, but politicians usually
+ <a name="index-Linux-kernel-4">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-kernel_002c-Linux-4">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-development_002c-patents">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-patents_002c-difference-between-copyrights-and-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-copyright_002c-difference-between-patents-and">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Programmers can understand this immediately, but politicians usually
don’t know much about programming; they usually imagine that patents
are basically much like copyrights, only somehow stronger. They
imagine that since software developers are not endangered by the
@@ -958,48 +1172,56 @@ program you have the copyright, [therefore likewise] if
you write a
program you have the patents also. This is false—so how do we give
them a clue what patents would really do? What they really do in
countries like the US?
-</p>
-<p>I find it’s useful to make an analogy between software and
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ I find it’s useful to make an analogy between software and
symphonies. Here’s why it’s a good analogy.
-</p>
-<p>A program or symphony combines many ideas. A symphony combines many
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ A program or symphony combines many ideas. A symphony combines many
musical ideas. But you can’t just pick a bunch of ideas and say
“Here’s my combination of ideas, do you like it?” Because in order to
make them work you have to implement them all. You can’t just pick
musical ideas and list them and say, “Hey, how do you like this
combination?” You can’t hear that [list]. You have to write notes
which implement all these ideas together.
-</p>
-<p>The hard task, the thing most of us wouldn’t be any good at, is
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The hard task, the thing most of us wouldn’t be any good at, is
writing all these notes to make the whole thing sound good. Sure, lots
of us could pick musical ideas out of a list, but we wouldn’t know how
to write a good-sounding symphony to implement those ideas. Only some
of us have that talent. That’s the thing that limits you. I could
probably invent a few musical ideas, but I wouldn’t know how to use
them to any effect.
-</p>
-<p>So imagine that it’s the 1700s, and the governments of Europe decide
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ So imagine that it’s the 1700s, and the governments of Europe decide
that they want to promote the progress of symphonic music by
establishing a system of musical idea patents, so that any musical
idea described in words could be patented.
-</p>
-<p>For instance, using a particular sequence of notes as a motif could be
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ For instance, using a particular sequence of notes as a motif could be
patented, or a chord progression could be patented, or a rhythmic
pattern could be patented, or using certain instruments by themselves
could be patented, or a format of repetitions in a movement could be
patented. Any sort of musical idea that could be described in words
would have been patentable.
-</p>
-<a name="index-Beethoven_002c-Ludwig-van"></a>
-<p>Now imagine that it’s 1800 and you’re Beethoven, and you want to write
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-Beethoven_002c-Ludwig-van">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Now imagine that it’s 1800 and you’re Beethoven, and you want to write
a symphony. You’re going to find it’s much harder to write a symphony
you don’t get sued for than to write one that sounds good, because you
have to thread your way around all the patents that exist. If you
complained about this, the patent holders would say, “Oh, Beethoven,
you’re just jealous because we had these ideas first. Why don’t you go
and think of some ideas of your own?”
-</p>
-<p>Now Beethoven had ideas of his own. The reason he’s considered a great
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Now Beethoven had ideas of his own. The reason he’s considered a great
composer is because of all of the new ideas that he had, and he
actually used. And he knew how to use them in such a way that they
would work, which was to combine them with lots of well-known
@@ -1007,8 +1229,9 @@ ideas. He could put a few new ideas into a composition
together with a
lot of old and uncontroversial ideas. And the result was a piece that
was controversial, but not so much so that people couldn’t get used to
it.
-</p>
-<p>To us, Beethoven’s music doesn’t sound controversial; I’m told it was,
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ To us, Beethoven’s music doesn’t sound controversial; I’m told it was,
when it was new. But because he combined his new ideas with a lot of
known ideas, he was able to give people a chance to stretch a certain
amount. And they could, which is why to us those ideas sound just
@@ -1017,9 +1240,11 @@ reinvent music from zero, not using any of the
well-known ideas, and
make something that people would want to listen to. And nobody is such
a genius he could reinvent computing from zero, not using any of the
well-known ideas, and make something that people want to use.
-<a name="index-Beethoven_002c-Ludwig-van-1"></a>
-</p>
-<p>When the technological context changes so frequently, you end up with
+ <a name="index-Beethoven_002c-Ludwig-van-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ When the technological context changes so frequently, you end up with
a situation where what was done 20 years ago is totally
inadequate. Twenty years ago there was no World Wide Web. So, sure,
people did a lot of things with computers back then, but what they
@@ -1028,16 +1253,21 @@ can’t do that using only the ideas that were known 20
years ago. And I
presume that the technological context will continue to change,
creating fresh opportunities for somebody to get patents that give the
shaft to the whole field.
-<a name="index-patents_002c-difference-between-copyrights-and-2"></a>
-<a name="index-copyright_002c-difference-between-patents-and-1"></a>
-</p>
-<p>Big companies can even do this themselves. For instance, a few years
-ago
-<a name="index-Microsoft_002c-and-patents"></a>
-Microsoft decided to make a phony open standard for documents and
-to get it approved as a standard by corrupting the
-<a name="index-International-Organization-for-Standardization"></a>
-International
+ <a name="index-patents_002c-difference-between-copyrights-and-2">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-copyright_002c-difference-between-patents-and-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Big companies can even do this themselves. For instance, a few years
+ago
+ <a name="index-Microsoft_002c-and-patents">
+ </a>
+ Microsoft decided to make a phony open standard for documents and
+to get it approved as a standard by corrupting the
+ <a name="index-International-Organization-for-Standardization">
+ </a>
+ International
Standards Organization, which they did. But they designed it using
something that Microsoft had patented. Microsoft is big enough that it
can start with a patent, design a format or protocol to use that
@@ -1048,12 +1278,17 @@ corrupted standards bodies. Just by its weight it can
push people into
using that format, and that basically means that they get a
stranglehold over the whole world. So we need to show the politicians
what’s really going on here. We need to show them why this is bad.
-</p>
-<p>Now I’ve heard it said that the reason
-<a name="index-New-Zealand"></a>
-New Zealand is considering
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Now I’ve heard it said that the reason
+ <a name="index-New-Zealand">
+ </a>
+ New Zealand is considering
software patents is that one large company wants to be given some
monopolies. To restrict everyone in the country so that one company
will make more money is the absolute opposite of statesmanship.
-<a name="index-development_002c-patents-1"></a>
-</p><hr size="2"></section></body></html>
+ <a name="index-development_002c-patents-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <hr size="2"/>
+</section>
diff --git a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_26.html
b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_26.html
index 0e78889..bc00f18 100644
--- a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_26.html
+++ b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_26.html
@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
-<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/loose.dtd";>
-<html><!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
+<!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
Free Software Foundation
@@ -19,102 +18,106 @@ ISBN 978-0-9831592-0-9
Cover design by Rob Myers.
Cover photograph by Peter Hinely.
- --><!-- Created on February 18, 2016 by texi2html 1.82
-texi2html was written by:
- Lionel Cons <address@hidden> (original author)
- Karl Berry <address@hidden>
- Olaf Bachmann <address@hidden>
- and many others.
-Maintained by: Many creative people.
-Send bugs and suggestions to <address@hidden>
---><head><title>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 26. Microsoft's New
Monopoly</title><meta name="description" content="This is the second edition of
Richard Stallman's collection of essays."><meta name="keywords" content="Free
Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 26. Microsoft's New Monopoly"><meta
name="resource-type" content="document"><meta name="distribution"
content="global"><meta name="Generator" content="texi2html 1.82"><meta
http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset= [...]
-<!--
-a.summary-letter {text-decoration: none}
-blockquote.smallquotation {font-size: smaller}
-pre.display {font-family: serif}
-pre.format {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-comment {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-preformatted {font-family: serif}
-pre.smalldisplay {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallexample {font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallformat {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smalllisp {font-size: smaller}
-span.roman {font-family:serif; font-weight:normal;}
-span.sansserif {font-family:sans-serif; font-weight:normal;}
-ul.toc {list-style: none}
--->
-</style><link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
href="../static/web-common/style.css"></head><body lang="en" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
text="#000000" link="#0000FF" vlink="#800080" alink="#FF0000" class="article">
+ -->
-<a name="New-Monopoly"></a>
-<header><div id="logo"><a href="/"><img src="../static/gnu.svg" height="100"
width="100"></a></div><h1 class="book-title">Free Software, Free Society, 2nd
ed.</h1></header><section id="main"><a name="Microsoft_0027s-New-Monopoly"></a>
-<h1 class="chapter"> 26. Microsoft’s New Monopoly </h1>
-
-<a
name="index-patents_002c-historical-significance-of-OOXML-patent-problem-_0028see-also-Microsoft_0029"></a>
-<a name="index-patents_002c-Microsoft-monopoly"></a>
-<a name="index-Microsoft_002c-monopoly"></a>
-
-<blockquote class="smallquotation">
-<p>This article was written in July 2005. Microsoft adopted a different
+<section id="main">
+ <a name="Microsoft_0027s-New-Monopoly">
+ </a>
+ <h1 class="chapter">
+ 26. Microsoft’s New Monopoly
+ </h1>
+ <a
name="index-patents_002c-historical-significance-of-OOXML-patent-problem-_0028see-also-Microsoft_0029">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-patents_002c-Microsoft-monopoly">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Microsoft_002c-monopoly">
+ </a>
+ <blockquote class="smallquotation">
+ <p>
+ This article was written in July 2005. Microsoft adopted a different
policy in 2006, so the specific policies described below and the
specific criticisms of them are only of historical significance. The
overall problem remains, however: Microsoft’s cunningly worded new
policy (see
-<a
href="http://grokdoc.net/index.php/EOOXML_objections#Patent_rights_to_implement_the_Ecma_376_specification_have_not_been_granted";>http://grokdoc.net/index.php/EOOXML_objections#Patent_rights_to_implement_the_Ecma_376_specification_have_not_been_granted</a>)
-does not give anyone clear permission to implement OOXML.<br></p>
-</blockquote>
-
-<p>European legislators who endorse software patents frequently claim
+ <a
href="http://grokdoc.net/index.php/EOOXML_objections#Patent_rights_to_implement_the_Ecma_376_specification_have_not_been_granted";>
+
http://grokdoc.net/index.php/EOOXML_objections#Patent_rights_to_implement_the_Ecma_376_specification_have_not_been_granted
+ </a>
+ )
+does not give anyone clear permission to implement OOXML.
+ <br/>
+ </p>
+ </blockquote>
+ <p>
+ European legislators who endorse software patents frequently claim
that those wouldn’t affect free software (or “open
source”). Microsoft’s lawyers are determined to prove they are
mistaken.
-</p>
-<p>Leaked internal documents in 1998 said that Microsoft considered
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Leaked internal documents in 1998 said that Microsoft considered
the free software GNU/Linux operating system (referred to therein as
-<a
name="index-_0060_0060Linux_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term-_0028see-also-open-source_0029-4"></a>
-“Linux”) as the principal competitor to
-<a name="index-Windows-2"></a>
-Windows, and spoke
+ <a
name="index-_0060_0060Linux_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term-_0028see-also-open-source_0029-4">
+ </a>
+ “Linux”) as the principal competitor to
+ <a name="index-Windows-2">
+ </a>
+ Windows, and spoke
of using patents and secret file formats to hold us back.
-</p>
-<p>Because Microsoft has so much market power, it can often impose
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Because Microsoft has so much market power, it can often impose
new standards at will. It need only patent some minor idea, design
a file format, programming language, or communication protocol
based on it, and then pressure users to adopt it. Then we in the
free software community will be forbidden to provide software that
does what these users want; they will be locked in to Microsoft,
and we will be locked out from serving them.
-</p>
-<p>Previously Microsoft tried to get its patented scheme for
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Previously Microsoft tried to get its patented scheme for
spam blocking adopted as an Internet standard, so as to exclude free
software from handling email. The standards committee in charge
rejected the proposal, but Microsoft said it would try to convince
-large
-<a name="index-ISP-_0028Internet-Service-Provider_0029-1"></a>
-ISPs to use the scheme anyway.
-</p>
-<a
name="index-Word_002c-and-treacherous-computing-_0028see-also-treacherous-computing_0029"></a>
-<p>Now Microsoft is planning to try something similar for Word
+large
+ <a name="index-ISP-_0028Internet-Service-Provider_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ ISPs to use the scheme anyway.
+ </p>
+ <a
name="index-Word_002c-and-treacherous-computing-_0028see-also-treacherous-computing_0029">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Now Microsoft is planning to try something similar for Word
files.
-</p>
-<p>Several years ago, Microsoft abandoned its documented format for
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Several years ago, Microsoft abandoned its documented format for
saving documents, and switched to a new format which was secret.
-However, the developers of free software word
-<a name="index-processors"></a>
-processors such as
-<a name="index-AbiWord"></a>
-AbiWord and
-<a name="index-OpenOffice_002eorg-1"></a>
-OpenOffice.org experimented assiduously for years to
+However, the developers of free software word
+ <a name="index-processors">
+ </a>
+ processors such as
+ <a name="index-AbiWord">
+ </a>
+ AbiWord and
+ <a name="index-OpenOffice_002eorg-1">
+ </a>
+ OpenOffice.org experimented assiduously for years to
figure out the format, and now those programs can read most Word
files. But Microsoft isn’t licked yet.
-</p>
-<p>The next version of Microsoft Word will use formats that involve a
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The next version of Microsoft Word will use formats that involve a
technique that Microsoft claims to hold a patent on. Microsoft offers
a royalty-free patent license for certain limited purposes, but it is
so limited that it does not allow free software. You can see the
-license here: <a
href="http://microsoft.com/whdc/xps/xpspatentlic.mspx";>http://microsoft.com/whdc/xps/xpspatentlic.mspx</a>.
-</p>
-<p>Free software is defined as software that respects four
+license here:
+ <a href="http://microsoft.com/whdc/xps/xpspatentlic.mspx";>
+ http://microsoft.com/whdc/xps/xpspatentlic.mspx
+ </a>
+ .
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Free software is defined as software that respects four
fundamental freedoms: (0) freedom to run the software as you wish,
(1) freedom to study the source code and modify it to do what you
wish, (2) freedom to make and redistribute copies, and (3) freedom
@@ -122,17 +125,20 @@ to publish modified versions. Only programmers can
directly
exercise freedoms 1 and 3, but all users can exercise freedoms 0
and 2, and all users benefit from the modifications that
programmers write and publish.
-</p>
-<p>Distributing an application under Microsoft’s patent license
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Distributing an application under Microsoft’s patent license
imposes license terms that prohibit most possible modifications of the
software. Lacking freedom 3, the freedom to publish modified versions,
it would not be free software. (I think it could not be “open
source” software either, since that definition is similar; but
it is not identical, and I cannot speak for the advocates of open
source.)
-</p>
-<a name="index-Microsoft_002c-license"></a>
-<p>The Microsoft license also requires inclusion of a specific
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-Microsoft_002c-license">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The Microsoft license also requires inclusion of a specific
statement. That requirement would not in itself prevent the program
from being free: it is normal for free software to carry license
notices that cannot be changed, and this statement could be included
@@ -142,17 +148,25 @@ one is not required to endorse the statement as true or
even meaningful, only to
include it. The software developer could cancel its misleading effect
with a disclaimer like this: “The following misleading statement
has been imposed on us by Microsoft; please be advised that it is
-propaganda. See <a
href="http://gnu.org/philosophy/not-ipr.html";>http://gnu.org/philosophy/not-ipr.html</a>
for more
+propaganda. See
+ <a href="http://gnu.org/philosophy/not-ipr.html";>
+ http://gnu.org/philosophy/not-ipr.html
+ </a>
+ for more
explanation.”
-</p>
-<p>However, the requirement to include a fixed piece of text is
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ However, the requirement to include a fixed piece of text is
actually quite cunning, because anyone who does so has explicitly
accepted and applied the restrictions of the Microsoft patent
license. The resulting program is clearly not free software.
-</p>
-<a name="index-Microsoft_002c-and-GPL"></a>
-<a name="index-GPL_002c-and-Microsoft-license"></a>
-<p>Some free software licenses, such as the most popular GNU General
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-Microsoft_002c-and-GPL">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GPL_002c-and-Microsoft-license">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Some free software licenses, such as the most popular GNU General
Public License (GNU GPL), forbid publication of a modified version if it isn’t
free software in the same way. (We call that the “liberty or
death” clause, since it ensures the program will remain free or
@@ -162,9 +176,11 @@ free software licenses permit nonfree modified versions.
It wouldn’t
be illegal to modify such a program and publish the modified version
under Microsoft’s patent license. But that modified version, with its
modified license, wouldn’t be free software.
-</p>
-<a
name="index-Word_002c-and-treacherous-computing-_0028see-also-treacherous-computing_0029-1"></a>
-<p>Microsoft’s patent covering the new Word format is a US patent.
+ </p>
+ <a
name="index-Word_002c-and-treacherous-computing-_0028see-also-treacherous-computing_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Microsoft’s patent covering the new Word format is a US patent.
It doesn’t restrict anyone in Europe; Europeans are free to make
and use software that can read this format. Europeans that develop
or use software currently enjoy an advantage over Americans:
@@ -173,29 +189,43 @@ activities in the US, but the Europeans cannot be sued
for their
activities in Europe. Europeans can already get US software patents
and sue Americans, but Americans cannot get European software
patents if Europe doesn’t allow them.
-</p>
-<a name="index-European-Parliament-1"></a>
-<p>All that will change if the European Parliament authorizes
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-European-Parliament-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ All that will change if the European Parliament authorizes
software patents. Microsoft will be one of thousands of foreign
software patent holders that will bring their patents over to
Europe to sue the software developers and computer users there. Of
the 50,000-odd putatively invalid software patents issued by the
-<a name="index-European-Patent-Office-1"></a>
-European Patent Office, around 80 percent do not belong to Europeans. The
+ <a name="index-European-Patent-Office-1">
+ </a>
+ European Patent Office, around 80 percent do not belong to Europeans. The
European Parliament should vote to keep these patents invalid, and
keep Europeans safe.
-</p>
-<a name="g_t2009-Note"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> 2009 Note </h3>
-
-<p>The EU directive to allow software patents was
+ </p>
+ <a name="g_t2009-Note">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ 2009 Note
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ The EU directive to allow software patents was
rejected, but the European Patent Office has continued issuing them
and some countries treat them as valid.
-See <a href="http://ffii.org";>http://ffii.org</a> for more information and
+See
+ <a href="http://ffii.org";>
+ http://ffii.org
+ </a>
+ for more information and
to participate in the campaign against software patents in Europe.
-<a name="index-patents-3"></a>
-<a
name="index-patents_002c-historical-significance-of-OOXML-patent-problem-_0028see-also-Microsoft_0029-1"></a>
-<a name="index-patents_002c-Microsoft-monopoly-1"></a>
-<a name="index-Microsoft_002c-monopoly-1"></a>
-</p>
-</section></body></html>
+ <a name="index-patents-3">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-patents_002c-historical-significance-of-OOXML-patent-problem-_0028see-also-Microsoft_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-patents_002c-Microsoft-monopoly-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Microsoft_002c-monopoly-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+</section>
diff --git a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_27.html
b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_27.html
index d407b72..8a1de1e 100644
--- a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_27.html
+++ b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_27.html
@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
-<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/loose.dtd";>
-<html><!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
+<!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
Free Software Foundation
@@ -19,53 +18,39 @@ ISBN 978-0-9831592-0-9
Cover design by Rob Myers.
Cover photograph by Peter Hinely.
- --><!-- Created on February 18, 2016 by texi2html 1.82
-texi2html was written by:
- Lionel Cons <address@hidden> (original author)
- Karl Berry <address@hidden>
- Olaf Bachmann <address@hidden>
- and many others.
-Maintained by: Many creative people.
-Send bugs and suggestions to <address@hidden>
---><head><title>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 27. Introduction to the
Licenses</title><meta name="description" content="This is the second edition of
Richard Stallman's collection of essays."><meta name="keywords" content="Free
Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 27. Introduction to the Licenses"><meta
name="resource-type" content="document"><meta name="distribution"
content="global"><meta name="Generator" content="texi2html 1.82"><meta
http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; [...]
-<!--
-a.summary-letter {text-decoration: none}
-blockquote.smallquotation {font-size: smaller}
-pre.display {font-family: serif}
-pre.format {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-comment {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-preformatted {font-family: serif}
-pre.smalldisplay {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallexample {font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallformat {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smalllisp {font-size: smaller}
-span.roman {font-family:serif; font-weight:normal;}
-span.sansserif {font-family:sans-serif; font-weight:normal;}
-ul.toc {list-style: none}
--->
-</style><link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
href="../static/web-common/style.css"></head><body lang="en" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
text="#000000" link="#0000FF" vlink="#800080" alink="#FF0000" class="article">
+ -->
-<a name="Licenses-Introduction"></a>
-<header><div id="logo"><a href="/"><img src="../static/gnu.svg" height="100"
width="100"></a></div><h1 class="book-title">Free Software, Free Society, 2nd
ed.</h1></header><section id="main"><a name="Introduction-to-the-Licenses"></a>
-<h1 class="chapter"> 27. Introduction to the Licenses </h1>
-
-<a
name="index-licenses-_0028see-also-Affero_002c-FDL_002c-GPL_002c-LGPL_002c-X11_002c-BSD_002c-XFree86_002c-and-lax-permissive-licenses_0029"></a>
-<a name="index-GPL_002c-introduction-to-1"></a>
-<a name="index-Smith_002c-Brett"></a>
-<p>Written by Brett Smith and Richard Stallman.
-<br>
-This part contains the text of the latest versions of the primary GNU
+<section id="main">
+ <a name="Introduction-to-the-Licenses">
+ </a>
+ <h1 class="chapter">
+ 27. Introduction to the Licenses
+ </h1>
+ <a
name="index-licenses-_0028see-also-Affero_002c-FDL_002c-GPL_002c-LGPL_002c-X11_002c-BSD_002c-XFree86_002c-and-lax-permissive-licenses_0029">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GPL_002c-introduction-to-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Smith_002c-Brett">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Written by Brett Smith and Richard Stallman.
+ <br>
+ This part contains the text of the latest versions of the primary GNU
licenses: the GNU General Public License (GNU GPL), the GNU Lesser
General Public License (LGPL), and the GNU Free Documentation License
(FDL). Though they are legal documents, they belong in this book of
essays because they are concrete expressions of the ideals of free
software.
-</p>
-<a name="index-Stallman_002c-Richard-4"></a>
-<p>Software development for the GNU operating system began in 1984. Once
-Richard Stallman had parts of the
-<a name="index-GNU-_0028see-also-both-software-and-GNU_0029-7"></a>
-GNU system that were worth releasing, he
+ </br>
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-Stallman_002c-Richard-4">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Software development for the GNU operating system began in 1984. Once
+Richard Stallman had parts of the
+ <a name="index-GNU-_0028see-also-both-software-and-GNU_0029-7">
+ </a>
+ GNU system that were worth releasing, he
needed a license to release them under. Some free software licenses
already existed; these gave users permission to modify and
redistribute the software, but they also allowed using the code in
@@ -73,9 +58,11 @@ proprietary versions and proprietary programs. Using those
licenses,
GNU would have failed to achieve its goal of delivering freedom to all
users, because middlemen would have converted the GNU code into
proprietary software.
-</p>
-<a name="index-copyleft-_0028see-also-copyright_0029-7"></a>
-<p>So Stallman devised a license to assure every user the freedom to
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-copyleft-_0028see-also-copyright_0029-7">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ So Stallman devised a license to assure every user the freedom to
modify and redistribute the software. It granted these permissions
under one key condition: whoever distributed the software must pass
along the authorization to modify and redistribute that same software,
@@ -83,59 +70,73 @@ along with the source code making it practical to do so.
Stallman
coined the term “copyleft” (see “What Is Copyleft?”)
to describe this key twist of using the legal
power of copyright to ensure freedom for all users.
-</p>
-<p>GNU copyleft licenses were first developed for software, and later for
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ GNU copyleft licenses were first developed for software, and later for
related areas such as software documentation. In them, the principles
of the free software movement, explained throughout the essays in this
book, take practical form. Each of their successive revisions has had
to wrestle with free software’s legal and practical obstacles and
offers numerous illustrations of how free software ideals are codified
into legal terms.
-</p>
-<a name="The-Origins-of-the-GPL"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> The Origins of the GPL </h3>
-
-<a name="index-GPL_002c-introduction-to-2"></a>
-<p>The first version of the GNU General Public License was published in
+ </p>
+ <a name="The-Origins-of-the-GPL">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ The Origins of the GPL
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-GPL_002c-introduction-to-2">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The first version of the GNU General Public License was published in
1989—but Stallman had been releasing software under
copyleft licenses as part of the GNU Project since as early as 1985.
Prior to 1989, each published GNU program had been covered by a
license specifically tailored for it. Instead of a single GNU General
-Public License, there was a
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-CC-General-Public-License"></a>
-<a name="index-GNU-CC-General-Public-License"></a>
-GNU CC General Public License, a
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GDB-General-Public-License"></a>
-<a name="index-GDB-General-Public-License"></a>
-GDB
+Public License, there was a
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-CC-General-Public-License">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GNU-CC-General-Public-License">
+ </a>
+ GNU CC General Public License, a
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GDB-General-Public-License">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GDB-General-Public-License">
+ </a>
+ GDB
General Public License, and so on. These licenses were identical
except for minor differences: for instance, terms about displaying
license notices to users were different for different programs and,
unless it covered a program that was just one source file, each
license contained the name of the program it applied to.
-</p>
-<p>By 1989, Stallman had had enough experience with different GNU
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ By 1989, Stallman had had enough experience with different GNU
packages under slightly different licenses to conclude that it was
crucial to unify them into one license that would cover all these
-packages. He worked with
-<a name="index-Cohen_002c-Jerry"></a>
-Jerry Cohen, an attorney at
-<a name="index-Perkins-Smith-_0026-Cohen-LLP"></a>
-Perkins Smith
+packages. He worked with
+ <a name="index-Cohen_002c-Jerry">
+ </a>
+ Jerry Cohen, an attorney at
+ <a name="index-Perkins-Smith-_0026-Cohen-LLP">
+ </a>
+ Perkins Smith
& Cohen LLP, to collect concepts from all the different licenses
written up to that point, and bring them together into one license.
It was thus that on 1 February 1989 the GNU General Public License
was born.
-</p>
-<p>The first version of the license sought to ensure two results: first,
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The first version of the license sought to ensure two results: first,
that all derived works of the software would be released under the
same license and, second, that everyone who received the software
would have a chance to get the source code. These requirements
implement a strong copyleft by blocking the three main ways of making
programs proprietary: with copyright, with end user license
agreements, and by not distributing source code.
-</p>
-<p>In comparison to the program-specific licenses that had preceded it,
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ In comparison to the program-specific licenses that had preceded it,
GPL version 1 featured few substantial changes—the GPL was
evolutionary, not revolutionary—but it made a big practical
difference. Previously, developers who had wanted to copyleft a
@@ -144,26 +145,40 @@ program. Many had not bothered. With the release of the
GPL, those
developers had a license they could use out of the box to provide all
of their users with freedom to share and change the software. It was a
powerful tool.
-</p>
-<a name="Version-2"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Version 2 </h3>
-
-<a name="index-patents_002c-GPL-version-2-and"></a>
-<a name="index-GPL_002c-introduction-to-3"></a>
-<p>After the 1981
-<a name="index-Supreme-Court_002c-US-3"></a>
-US Supreme Court decision in
-<a name="index-patents_002c-Diamond-v_002e-Diehr"></a>
-<cite>Diamond v. Diehr,</cite> the
-<a name="index-Patent-and-Trademark-Office_002c-US"></a>
-<a name="index-patents_002c-US-Patent-and-Trademark-Office"></a>
-<a name="index-trademarks_002c-US-Patent-and-Trademark-Office"></a>
-US Patent and Trademark Office began issuing patents for software.
+ </p>
+ <a name="Version-2">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Version 2
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-patents_002c-GPL-version-2-and">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GPL_002c-introduction-to-3">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ After the 1981
+ <a name="index-Supreme-Court_002c-US-3">
+ </a>
+ US Supreme Court decision in
+ <a name="index-patents_002c-Diamond-v_002e-Diehr">
+ </a>
+ <cite>
+ Diamond v. Diehr,
+ </cite>
+ the
+ <a name="index-Patent-and-Trademark-Office_002c-US">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-patents_002c-US-Patent-and-Trademark-Office">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-trademarks_002c-US-Patent-and-Trademark-Office">
+ </a>
+ US Patent and Trademark Office began issuing patents for software.
Software patents threaten free software and proprietary software alike
(see part IV in this book), and Stallman realized that they could
subvert the copyleft in the GNU GPL.
-</p>
-<p>By selectively issuing patent licenses, patent holders can arbitrarily
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ By selectively issuing patent licenses, patent holders can arbitrarily
control how the software under them is distributed or modified. A
patent holder can give one party permission to resell the program,
another permission to develop and use a modified version at her
@@ -174,8 +189,9 @@ implements the patented idea, whether or not they have
modified or
distributed it themselves. This power threatens free software because
third parties with patents can impose restrictions on free software
users and developers.
-</p>
-<p>If patent holders don’t distribute or modify software, then a software
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ If patent holders don’t distribute or modify software, then a software
license based on copyright like the GPL can’t control their
activities: they haven’t done anything that requires permission under
the license. But the software license can stop each of the program’s
@@ -190,10 +206,13 @@ that the terms of that license are consistent with all of
the GPL’s
conditions: recipients of the software must receive it under the same
terms, with no additional restrictions, and have the means to get the
source code.
-</p>
-<a name="index-GPL_002dcovered-software-_0028see-also-software_0029-2"></a>
-<a
name="index-GPL_002c-GPL_002dcovered-software-_0028see-also-software_0029-2"></a>
-<p>This new section protected the integrity of the distribution system
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-GPL_002dcovered-software-_0028see-also-software_0029-2">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-GPL_002c-GPL_002dcovered-software-_0028see-also-software_0029-2">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ This new section protected the integrity of the distribution system
for GPL-covered software. A fundamental principle of the license is
that every licensee, from the most humble individual to the largest
corporation, has the exact same rights to share and change the
@@ -201,30 +220,40 @@ software. Patent holders who do not distribute the
software themselves
and selectively issues patent licenses could potentially interfere
with this goal, splitting licensees into different groups however they
see fit. Section 7 of GPL version 2 prevents this abuse.
-<a name="index-GPL_002c-introduction-to-4"></a>
-</p>
-<a name="The-LGPL"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> The LGPL </h3>
-
-<a name="index-LGPL_002c-introduction-to"></a>
-<a name="index-libraries-_0028comp_002e_0029_002c-LGPL-and-1"></a>
-<p>The GPL worked well for the programming tools, utilities, and
-<a name="index-games_002c-GPL-and"></a>
-games
+ <a name="index-GPL_002c-introduction-to-4">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <a name="The-LGPL">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ The LGPL
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-LGPL_002c-introduction-to">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-libraries-_0028comp_002e_0029_002c-LGPL-and-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The GPL worked well for the programming tools, utilities, and
+ <a name="index-games_002c-GPL-and">
+ </a>
+ games
that were released by the GNU Project in the early years; however,
-Stallman recognized that releasing the recently developed
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-C-Library-4"></a>
-GNU C
+Stallman recognized that releasing the recently developed
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-C-Library-4">
+ </a>
+ GNU C
Library the same way could backfire. Aside from some extensions, the
GNU C Library was to be a compatible replacement for the UNIX C
-Library, so any
-<a name="index-C-programs-1"></a>
-C program would be able link with either one. If
+Library, so any
+ <a name="index-C-programs-1">
+ </a>
+ C program would be able link with either one. If
proprietary C programs were not allowed to use the GNU C Library, they
would simply use the UNIX library. Being strict in this case would
gain nothing.
-</p>
-<p>Stallman decided to compromise with a modified copyleft: one that
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Stallman decided to compromise with a modified copyleft: one that
would protect the freedom of the library itself, but not that of the
programs that use it. This idea was implemented in a license
originally called the GNU Library General Public License, first
@@ -237,8 +266,9 @@ combining the program and the library had to come with a
copy of the
LGPL and source code for the library, and provide some mechanism for
users who have modified the library to update the executable to use
their modified library.
-</p>
-<p>How does a developer use the work as a library in order to take
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ How does a developer use the work as a library in order to take
advantage of the special set of conditions provided by LGPLv2? Think
of a computer program as a series of instructions for doing a
particular job: compiling or linking the program with a library
@@ -251,8 +281,9 @@ perhaps introduce bugs in the process—every time they want
to
accomplish a particular task. Because libraries are so widely created
and used, developers have the means to readily take advantage of the
LGPL’s additional permissions.
-</p>
-<p>Version 2.0 of the license worked as intended: in some situations,
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Version 2.0 of the license worked as intended: in some situations,
proprietary software developers chose to use an LGPL-covered library
over a proprietary alternative, and users received the freedom to
share and change that library. This did not produce an “ideal”
@@ -260,8 +291,9 @@ outcome—where the user had complete control over the entire
program—but in these cases the GPL would not have achieved that
ideal outcome either. The LGPL assured the users some freedom where
they would have otherwise had none.
-</p>
-<p>The name “Library GPL” led some free software developers to assume all
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The name “Library GPL” led some free software developers to assume all
libraries ought on principle to be licensed this way, but that was not
the intent—when a free library has no proprietary competitor,
releasing it under the GNU GPL can benefit free software. To avoid
@@ -272,43 +304,57 @@ a new preamble, a few wording clarifications, and allowed
programs to
make their calls to the library through special system facilities for
shared libraries where those are available. The Lesser General Public
License version 2.1 was released in February 1999.
-<a name="index-LGPL_002c-introduction-to-1"></a>
-<a name="index-libraries-_0028comp_002e_0029_002c-LGPL-and-2"></a>
-</p>
-<a name="The-FDL"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> The FDL </h3>
-
-<a name="index-FDL_002c-introduction-to"></a>
-<a name="index-manuals_002c-FDL-and-1"></a>
-<p>At the turn of the century, free software was growing much faster than
+ <a name="index-LGPL_002c-introduction-to-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-libraries-_0028comp_002e_0029_002c-LGPL-and-2">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <a name="The-FDL">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ The FDL
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-FDL_002c-introduction-to">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-manuals_002c-FDL-and-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ At the turn of the century, free software was growing much faster than
it had been previously; the documentation, however, was not keeping
pace. Stallman was concerned about this failure and wrote about it in
“Free Software Needs Free Documentation”.
-</p>
-<p>While there are some similarities between software and
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ While there are some similarities between software and
documentation—they are both works that are meant for practical
use—there are important differences in the ways they can be
used. The GPL and the LGPL were not suitable for manuals.
-</p>
-<p>For some time, GNU packages had been using an untitled, simple, ad hoc
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ For some time, GNU packages had been using an untitled, simple, ad hoc
copyleft license for each manual. Since each manual’s license was
different, text could not be copied from one manual to another. So
Stallman wrote the GNU Free Documentation License, a copyleft license
designed primarily for software documentation and other practical
written works.
-</p>
-<p>The FDL was first published in March 2000. The principles of the
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The FDL was first published in March 2000. The principles of the
copyleft remain the same: everyone who receives a copy of the work
should be able to modify and redistribute it. Where the FDL differs
from the software licenses is in the details of its implementation:
conditions about how to attribute the work and provide “source
code”—an editable version of the document—are different.
-</p>
-<a name="Version-3"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Version 3 </h3>
-
-<a name="index-GPL_002c-introduction-to-5"></a>
-<p>During the 1990s, as free software became more popular, the GPL
+ </p>
+ <a name="Version-3">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Version 3
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-GPL_002c-introduction-to-5">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ During the 1990s, as free software became more popular, the GPL
emerged as the clear copyleft license of choice for the community, and
was adopted by the majority of free software projects; at the same
time, however, proprietary developers had come up with methods of
@@ -316,8 +362,9 @@ effectively denying users the freedoms that the GPL was
meant to
protect, without actually violating the GPL. In addition, there were
other practices that the GPL did not handle conveniently. To deal
with these issues called for an updated version of the license.
-</p>
-<p>Around 2002, Stallman and others at the Free Software Foundation began
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Around 2002, Stallman and others at the Free Software Foundation began
discussing how to update the GPL, and the LGPL along with it. The FSF
established a public review process, run with help from attorneys at
the Software Freedom Law Center, to catch possible problems before
@@ -327,37 +374,49 @@ various positions and arguments to Stallman, who decided
what policy
to adopt; then he wrote license text with advice and suggestions from
the attorneys. The importance of the changes made are explained in
“Why Upgrade to GPLv3”.
-<a name="index-Stallman_002c-Richard-5"></a>
-</p>
-<a name="index-patents_002c-GPL-version-3-and"></a>
-<p>Version 3 used new terminology to promote uniform interpretations in
+ <a name="index-Stallman_002c-Richard-5">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-patents_002c-GPL-version-3-and">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Version 3 used new terminology to promote uniform interpretations in
different jurisdictions, and modified some requirements to fit new
practices in the free software community. Beyond that, it introduced
several new conditions to strengthen the copyleft and thereby the free
software community as a whole. For instance, it
-</p>
-<ul><li>
-<a name="index-copyleft_002c-modified-versions-3"></a>
- blocked distributors from restricting users by building hardware
- that rejects the users’ modified versions
-<a name="index-tivoization-1"></a>
-(“tivoization”);
-
-</li><li>
- allowed code to carry limited additional requirements, for
+ </p>
+ <ul>
+ <li>
+ <a name="index-copyleft_002c-modified-versions-3">
+ </a>
+ blocked distributors from restricting users by building hardware
+ that rejects the users’ modified versions
+ <a name="index-tivoization-1">
+ </a>
+ (“tivoization”);
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ allowed code to carry limited additional requirements, for
compatibility with some other popular free software licenses;
-
-</li><li>
- and strengthened patent requirements by providing clear terms to
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ and strengthened patent requirements by providing clear terms to
handle patent cross-licenses, which are common arrangements between
large patent-holding companies.
-
-</li></ul><p>Both GPLv3 and LGPLv3 included terms to address all of these
issues,
+ </li>
+ </ul>
+ <p>
+ Both GPLv3 and LGPLv3 included terms to address all of these issues,
and were finally released on 29 June 2007. These licenses are the
state of the art in copyleft, going farther than any other software
license to protect users’ freedom and bring about a world in harmony
with the ideals expressed in this book.
-</p>
-<p>@endgroup
-<a name="index-copyleft-_0028see-also-copyright_0029-8"></a>
-</p><hr size="2"></section></body></html>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ @endgroup
+ <a name="index-copyleft-_0028see-also-copyright_0029-8">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <hr size="2"/>
+</section>
diff --git a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_28.html
b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_28.html
index be1191f..5f1918c 100644
--- a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_28.html
+++ b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_28.html
@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
-<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/loose.dtd";>
-<html><!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
+<!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
Free Software Foundation
@@ -19,54 +18,49 @@ ISBN 978-0-9831592-0-9
Cover design by Rob Myers.
Cover photograph by Peter Hinely.
- --><!-- Created on February 18, 2016 by texi2html 1.82
-texi2html was written by:
- Lionel Cons <address@hidden> (original author)
- Karl Berry <address@hidden>
- Olaf Bachmann <address@hidden>
- and many others.
-Maintained by: Many creative people.
-Send bugs and suggestions to <address@hidden>
---><head><title>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 28. The GNU General
Public License</title><meta name="description" content="This is the second
edition of Richard Stallman's collection of essays."><meta name="keywords"
content="Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 28. The GNU General Public
License"><meta name="resource-type" content="document"><meta
name="distribution" content="global"><meta name="Generator" content="texi2html
1.82"><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/ht [...]
-<!--
-a.summary-letter {text-decoration: none}
-blockquote.smallquotation {font-size: smaller}
-pre.display {font-family: serif}
-pre.format {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-comment {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-preformatted {font-family: serif}
-pre.smalldisplay {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallexample {font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallformat {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smalllisp {font-size: smaller}
-span.roman {font-family:serif; font-weight:normal;}
-span.sansserif {font-family:sans-serif; font-weight:normal;}
-ul.toc {list-style: none}
--->
-</style><link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
href="../static/web-common/style.css"></head><body lang="en" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
text="#000000" link="#0000FF" vlink="#800080" alink="#FF0000" class="article">
-
-<a name="GPL"></a>
-<header><div id="logo"><a href="/"><img src="../static/gnu.svg" height="100"
width="100"></a></div><h1 class="book-title">Free Software, Free Society, 2nd
ed.</h1></header><section id="main"><a
name="The-GNU-General-Public-License"></a>
-<h1 class="chapter"> 28. The GNU General Public License </h1>
-
-<a
name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-General-Public-License-_0028GPL_0029-_0028see-also-GPL_0029"></a>
-<a
name="index-General-Public-License-_0028GPL_0029_002c-GNU-_0028see-also-GPL_0029"></a>
-<a name="index-GPL-5"></a>
-<p align="center"> Version 3, 29 June 2007
-</p>
-
-<table><tr><td> </td><td><pre class="display">Copyright © 2007 Free Software
Foundation, Inc. <a href="http://fsf.org/";>http://fsf.org/</a>
+ -->
+
+<section id="main">
+ <a name="The-GNU-General-Public-License">
+ </a>
+ <h1 class="chapter">
+ 28. The GNU General Public License
+ </h1>
+ <a
name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-General-Public-License-_0028GPL_0029-_0028see-also-GPL_0029">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-General-Public-License-_0028GPL_0029_002c-GNU-_0028see-also-GPL_0029">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GPL-5">
+ </a>
+ <p align="center">
+ Version 3, 29 June 2007
+ </p>
+ <table>
+ <tr>
+ <td>
+ </td>
+ <td>
+ <pre class="display">Copyright © 2007 Free Software Foundation, Inc. <a
href="http://fsf.org/";>http://fsf.org/</a>
51 Franklin St., Floor 5, Boston, MA 02110-1335, USA
Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies of this license
document, but changing it is not allowed.
-</pre></td></tr></table><a name="Preamble"></a>
-<h2 class="heading"> Preamble </h2>
-
-<a name="index-copyleft_002c-and-GPL-1"></a>
-<p>The GNU General Public License is a free, copyleft license for
+</pre>
+ </td>
+ </tr>
+ </table>
+ <a name="Preamble">
+ </a>
+ <h2 class="heading">
+ Preamble
+ </h2>
+ <a name="index-copyleft_002c-and-GPL-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The GNU General Public License is a free, copyleft license for
software and other kinds of works.
-</p>
-<p>The licenses for most software and other practical works are designed
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The licenses for most software and other practical works are designed
to take away your freedom to share and change the works. By contrast,
the GNU General Public License is intended to guarantee your freedom
to share and change all versions of a program—to make sure it remains
@@ -74,37 +68,43 @@ free software for all its users. We, the Free Software
Foundation,
use the GNU General Public License for most of our software; it
applies also to any other work released this way by its authors. You
can apply it to your programs, too.
-</p>
-<p>When we speak of free software, we are referring to freedom, not
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ When we speak of free software, we are referring to freedom, not
price. Our General Public Licenses are designed to make sure that you
have the freedom to distribute copies of free software (and charge for
them if you wish), that you receive source code or can get it if you
want it, that you can change the software or use pieces of it in new
free programs, and that you know you can do these things.
-</p>
-<p>To protect your rights, we need to prevent others from denying you
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ To protect your rights, we need to prevent others from denying you
these rights or asking you to surrender the rights. Therefore, you
have certain responsibilities if you distribute copies of the
software, or if you modify it: responsibilities to respect the freedom
of others.
-</p>
-<p>For example, if you distribute copies of such a program, whether
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ For example, if you distribute copies of such a program, whether
gratis or for a fee, you must pass on to the recipients the same
freedoms that you received. You must make sure that they, too,
receive or can get the source code. And you must show them these
terms so they know their rights.
-</p>
-<p>Developers that use the GNU GPL protect your rights with two steps:
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Developers that use the GNU GPL protect your rights with two steps:
(1) assert copyright on the software, and (2) offer you this License
giving you legal permission to copy, distribute and/or modify it.
-</p>
-<p>For the developers’ and authors’ protection, the GPL clearly explains
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ For the developers’ and authors’ protection, the GPL clearly explains
that there is no warranty for this free software. For both users’ and
authors’ sake, the GPL requires that modified versions be marked as
changed, so that their problems will not be attributed erroneously to
authors of previous versions.
-</p>
-<p>Some devices are designed to deny users access to install or run
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Some devices are designed to deny users access to install or run
modified versions of the software inside them, although the
manufacturer can do so. This is fundamentally incompatible with the
aim of protecting users’ freedom to change the software. The
@@ -115,53 +115,69 @@ practice for those products. If such problems arise
substantially in
other domains, we stand ready to extend this provision to those
domains in future versions of the GPL, as needed to protect the
freedom of users.
-</p>
-<a name="index-patents_002c-GPL-version-3-and-1"></a>
-<p>Finally, every program is threatened constantly by software patents.
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-patents_002c-GPL-version-3-and-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Finally, every program is threatened constantly by software patents.
States should not allow patents to restrict development and use of
software on general-purpose computers, but in those that do, we wish
to avoid the special danger that patents applied to a free program
could make it effectively proprietary. To prevent this, the GPL
assures that patents cannot be used to render the program non-free.
-</p>
-<p>The precise terms and conditions for copying, distribution and
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The precise terms and conditions for copying, distribution and
modification follow.
-</p>
-<a name="TERMS-AND-CONDITIONS"></a>
-<h2 class="heading"> TERMS AND CONDITIONS </h2>
-
-<ol><li> <strong>Definitions.</strong>
-
-<p>“This License” refers to version 3 of the GNU General Public License.
-</p>
-<p>“Copyright” also means copyright-like laws that apply to other kinds
+ </p>
+ <a name="TERMS-AND-CONDITIONS">
+ </a>
+ <h2 class="heading">
+ TERMS AND CONDITIONS
+ </h2>
+ <ol>
+ <li>
+ <strong>
+ Definitions.
+ </strong>
+ <p>
+ “This License” refers to version 3 of the GNU General Public License.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ “Copyright” also means copyright-like laws that apply to other kinds
of works, such as semiconductor masks.
-</p>
-<p>“The Program” refers to any copyrightable work licensed under this
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ “The Program” refers to any copyrightable work licensed under this
License. Each licensee is addressed as “you”. “Licensees” and
“recipients” may be individuals or organizations.
-</p>
-<p>To “modify” a work means to copy from or adapt all or part of the work
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ To “modify” a work means to copy from or adapt all or part of the work
in a fashion requiring copyright permission, other than the making of
an exact copy. The resulting work is called a “modified version” of
the earlier work or a work “based on” the earlier work.
-</p>
-<p>A “covered work” means either the unmodified Program or a work based
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ A “covered work” means either the unmodified Program or a work based
on the Program.
-</p>
-<p>To “propagate” a work means to do anything with it that, without
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ To “propagate” a work means to do anything with it that, without
permission, would make you directly or secondarily liable for
infringement under applicable copyright law, except executing it on a
computer or modifying a private copy. Propagation includes copying,
distribution (with or without modification), making available to the
public, and in some countries other activities as well.
-</p>
-<p>To “convey” a work means any kind of propagation that enables other
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ To “convey” a work means any kind of propagation that enables other
parties to make or receive copies. Mere interaction with a user
through a computer network, with no transfer of a copy, is not
conveying.
-</p>
-<p>An interactive user interface displays “Appropriate Legal Notices” to
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ An interactive user interface displays “Appropriate Legal Notices” to
the extent that it includes a convenient and prominently visible
feature that (1) displays an appropriate copyright notice, and (2)
tells the user that there is no warranty for the work (except to the
@@ -169,19 +185,25 @@ extent that warranties are provided), that licensees may
convey the
work under this License, and how to view a copy of this License. If
the interface presents a list of user commands or options, such as a
menu, a prominent item in the list meets this criterion.
-</p>
-</li><li> <strong>Source Code.</strong>
-
-<p>The “source code” for a work means the preferred form of the work for
+ </p>
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ <strong>
+ Source Code.
+ </strong>
+ <p>
+ The “source code” for a work means the preferred form of the work for
making modifications to it. “Object code” means any non-source form
of a work.
-</p>
-<p>A “Standard Interface” means an interface that either is an official
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ A “Standard Interface” means an interface that either is an official
standard defined by a recognized standards body, or, in the case of
interfaces specified for a particular programming language, one that
is widely used among developers working in that language.
-</p>
-<p>The “System Libraries” of an executable work include anything, other
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The “System Libraries” of an executable work include anything, other
than the work as a whole, that (a) is included in the normal form of
packaging a Major Component, but which is not part of that Major
Component, and (b) serves only to enable use of the work with that
@@ -191,8 +213,9 @@ implementation is available to the public in source code
form. A
(kernel, window system, and so on) of the specific operating system
(if any) on which the executable work runs, or a compiler used to
produce the work, or an object code interpreter used to run it.
-</p>
-<p>The “Corresponding Source” for a work in object code form means all
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The “Corresponding Source” for a work in object code form means all
the source code needed to generate, install, and (for an executable
work) run the object code and to modify the work, including scripts to
control those activities. However, it does not include the work’s
@@ -204,26 +227,34 @@ the work, and the source code for shared libraries and
dynamically
linked subprograms that the work is specifically designed to require,
such as by intimate data communication or control flow between those
subprograms and other parts of the work.
-</p>
-<p>The Corresponding Source need not include anything that users can
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The Corresponding Source need not include anything that users can
regenerate automatically from other parts of the Corresponding Source.
-</p>
-<p>The Corresponding Source for a work in source code form is that same
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The Corresponding Source for a work in source code form is that same
work.
-</p>
-</li><li> <strong>Basic Permissions.</strong>
-
-<p>All rights granted under this License are granted for the term of
+ </p>
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ <strong>
+ Basic Permissions.
+ </strong>
+ <p>
+ All rights granted under this License are granted for the term of
copyright on the Program, and are irrevocable provided the stated
conditions are met. This License explicitly affirms your unlimited
permission to run the unmodified Program. The output from running a
covered work is covered by this License only if the output, given its
content, constitutes a covered work. This License acknowledges your
-rights of
-<a name="index-fair-use-_0028see-also-copyright_0029-2"></a>
-fair use or other equivalent, as provided by copyright law.
-</p>
-<p>You may make, run and propagate covered works that you do not convey,
+rights of
+ <a name="index-fair-use-_0028see-also-copyright_0029-2">
+ </a>
+ fair use or other equivalent, as provided by copyright law.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ You may make, run and propagate covered works that you do not convey,
without conditions so long as your license otherwise remains in force.
You may convey covered works to others for the sole purpose of having
them make modifications exclusively for you, or provide you with
@@ -233,73 +264,93 @@ control copyright. Those thus making or running the
covered works for
you must do so exclusively on your behalf, under your direction and
control, on terms that prohibit them from making any copies of your
copyrighted material outside their relationship with you.
-</p>
-<p>Conveying under any other circumstances is permitted solely under the
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Conveying under any other circumstances is permitted solely under the
conditions stated below. Sublicensing is not allowed; section 10
makes it unnecessary.
-</p>
-</li><li> <strong>Protecting Users’ Legal Rights From Anti-Circumvention
Law.</strong>
-
-<p>No covered work shall be deemed part of an effective technological
+ </p>
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ <strong>
+ Protecting Users’ Legal Rights From Anti-Circumvention Law.
+ </strong>
+ <p>
+ No covered work shall be deemed part of an effective technological
measure under any applicable law fulfilling obligations under article
11 of the WIPO copyright treaty adopted on 20 December 1996, or
similar laws prohibiting or restricting circumvention of such
measures.
-</p>
-<p>When you convey a covered work, you waive any legal power to forbid
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ When you convey a covered work, you waive any legal power to forbid
circumvention of technological measures to the extent such
circumvention is effected by exercising rights under this License with
respect to the covered work, and you disclaim any intention to limit
operation or modification of the work as a means of enforcing, against
the work’s users, your or third parties’ legal rights to forbid
circumvention of technological measures.
-</p>
-</li><li> <strong>Conveying Verbatim Copies.</strong>
-
-<p>You may convey verbatim copies of the Program’s source code as you
+ </p>
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ <strong>
+ Conveying Verbatim Copies.
+ </strong>
+ <p>
+ You may convey verbatim copies of the Program’s source code as you
receive it, in any medium, provided that you conspicuously and
appropriately publish on each copy an appropriate copyright notice;
keep intact all notices stating that this License and any
non-permissive terms added in accord with section 7 apply to the code;
keep intact all notices of the absence of any warranty; and give all
recipients a copy of this License along with the Program.
-</p>
-<p>You may charge any price or no price for each copy that you convey,
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ You may charge any price or no price for each copy that you convey,
and you may offer support or warranty protection for a fee.
-</p>
-</li><li> <strong>Conveying Modified Source Versions.</strong>
-
-<a name="index-copyleft_002c-modified-versions-4"></a>
-<p>You may convey a work based on the Program, or the modifications to
+ </p>
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ <strong>
+ Conveying Modified Source Versions.
+ </strong>
+ <a name="index-copyleft_002c-modified-versions-4">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ You may convey a work based on the Program, or the modifications to
produce it from the Program, in the form of source code under the
terms of section 4, provided that you also meet all of these
conditions:
-</p>
-<ol><li>
-The work must carry prominent notices stating that you modified it,
+ </p>
+ <ol>
+ <li>
+ The work must carry prominent notices stating that you modified it,
and giving a relevant date.
-
-</li><li>
-The work must carry prominent notices stating that it is released
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ The work must carry prominent notices stating that it is released
under this License and any conditions added under section 7. This
requirement modifies the requirement in section 4 to “keep intact all
notices”.
-
-</li><li>
-You must license the entire work, as a whole, under this License to
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ You must license the entire work, as a whole, under this License to
anyone who comes into possession of a copy. This License will
therefore apply, along with any applicable section 7 additional terms,
to the whole of the work, and all its parts, regardless of how they
are packaged. This License gives no permission to license the work in
any other way, but it does not invalidate such permission if you have
separately received it.
-
-</li><li>
-If the work has interactive user interfaces, each must display
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ If the work has interactive user interfaces, each must display
Appropriate Legal Notices; however, if the Program has interactive
interfaces that do not display Appropriate Legal Notices, your work
need not make them do so.
-</li></ol><p>A compilation of a covered work with other separate and
independent
+ </li>
+ </ol>
+ <p>
+ A compilation of a covered work with other separate and independent
works, which are not by their nature extensions of the covered work,
and which are not combined with it such as to form a larger program,
in or on a volume of a storage or distribution medium, is called an
@@ -308,23 +359,29 @@ used to limit the access or legal rights of the
compilation’s users
beyond what the individual works permit. Inclusion of a covered work
in an aggregate does not cause this License to apply to the other
parts of the aggregate.
-<a name="index-copyleft_002c-modified-versions-5"></a>
-</p>
-</li><li> <strong>Conveying Non-Source Forms.</strong>
-
-<p>You may convey a covered work in object code form under the terms of
+ <a name="index-copyleft_002c-modified-versions-5">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ <strong>
+ Conveying Non-Source Forms.
+ </strong>
+ <p>
+ You may convey a covered work in object code form under the terms of
sections 4 and 5, provided that you also convey the machine-readable
Corresponding Source under the terms of this License, in one of these
ways:
-</p>
-<ol><li>
-Convey the object code in, or embodied in, a physical product
+ </p>
+ <ol>
+ <li>
+ Convey the object code in, or embodied in, a physical product
(including a physical distribution medium), accompanied by the
Corresponding Source fixed on a durable physical medium customarily
used for software interchange.
-
-</li><li>
-Convey the object code in, or embodied in, a physical product
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ Convey the object code in, or embodied in, a physical product
(including a physical distribution medium), accompanied by a written
offer, valid for at least three years and valid for as long as you
offer spare parts or customer support for that product model, to give
@@ -334,16 +391,16 @@ covered by this License, on a durable physical medium
customarily used
for software interchange, for a price no more than your reasonable
cost of physically performing this conveying of source, or (2) access
to copy the Corresponding Source from a network server at no charge.
-
-</li><li>
-Convey individual copies of the object code with a copy of the written
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ Convey individual copies of the object code with a copy of the written
offer to provide the Corresponding Source. This alternative is
allowed only occasionally and noncommercially, and only if you
received the object code with such an offer, in accord with subsection
6b.
-
-</li><li>
-Convey the object code by offering access from a designated place
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ Convey the object code by offering access from a designated place
(gratis or for a charge), and offer equivalent access to the
Corresponding Source in the same way through the same place at no
further charge. You need not require recipients to copy the
@@ -355,19 +412,23 @@ next to the object code saying where to find the
Corresponding Source.
Regardless of what server hosts the Corresponding Source, you remain
obligated to ensure that it is available for as long as needed to
satisfy these requirements.
-
-</li><li>
-<a name="index-peer_002dto_002dpeer-1"></a>
-Convey the object code using peer-to-peer transmission, provided you
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ <a name="index-peer_002dto_002dpeer-1">
+ </a>
+ Convey the object code using peer-to-peer transmission, provided you
inform other peers where the object code and Corresponding Source of
the work are being offered to the general public at no charge under
subsection 6d.
-
-</li></ol><p>A separable portion of the object code, whose source code is
excluded
+ </li>
+ </ol>
+ <p>
+ A separable portion of the object code, whose source code is excluded
from the Corresponding Source as a System Library, need not be
included in conveying the object code work.
-</p>
-<p>A “User Product” is either (1) a “consumer product”, which means any
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ A “User Product” is either (1) a “consumer product”, which means any
tangible personal property which is normally used for personal,
family, or household purposes, or (2) anything designed or sold for
incorporation into a dwelling. In determining whether a product is a
@@ -380,16 +441,18 @@ to use, the product. A product is a consumer product
regardless of
whether the product has substantial commercial, industrial or
non-consumer uses, unless such uses represent the only significant
mode of use of the product.
-</p>
-<p>“Installation Information” for a User Product means any methods,
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ “Installation Information” for a User Product means any methods,
procedures, authorization keys, or other information required to
install and execute modified versions of a covered work in that User
Product from a modified version of its Corresponding Source. The
information must suffice to ensure that the continued functioning of
the modified object code is in no case prevented or interfered with
solely because modification has been made.
-</p>
-<p>If you convey an object code work under this section in, or with, or
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ If you convey an object code work under this section in, or with, or
specifically for use in, a User Product, and the conveying occurs as
part of a transaction in which the right of possession and use of the
User Product is transferred to the recipient in perpetuity or for a
@@ -399,8 +462,9 @@ by the Installation Information. But this requirement does
not apply
if neither you nor any third party retains the ability to install
modified object code on the User Product (for example, the work has
been installed in ROM).
-</p>
-<p>The requirement to provide Installation Information does not include a
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The requirement to provide Installation Information does not include a
requirement to continue to provide support service, warranty, or
updates for a work that has been modified or installed by the
recipient, or for the User Product in which it has been modified or
@@ -408,16 +472,21 @@ installed. Access to a network may be denied when the
modification
itself materially and adversely affects the operation of the network
or violates the rules and protocols for communication across the
network.
-</p>
-<p>Corresponding Source conveyed, and Installation Information provided,
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Corresponding Source conveyed, and Installation Information provided,
in accord with this section must be in a format that is publicly
documented (and with an implementation available to the public in
source code form), and must require no special password or key for
unpacking, reading or copying.
-</p>
-</li><li> <strong>Additional Terms.</strong>
-
-<p>“Additional permissions” are terms that supplement the terms of this
+ </p>
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ <strong>
+ Additional Terms.
+ </strong>
+ <p>
+ “Additional permissions” are terms that supplement the terms of this
License by making exceptions from one or more of its conditions.
Additional permissions that are applicable to the entire Program shall
be treated as though they were included in this License, to the extent
@@ -425,48 +494,55 @@ that they are valid under applicable law. If additional
permissions
apply only to part of the Program, that part may be used separately
under those permissions, but the entire Program remains governed by
this License without regard to the additional permissions.
-</p>
-<p>When you convey a copy of a covered work, you may at your option
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ When you convey a copy of a covered work, you may at your option
remove any additional permissions from that copy, or from any part of
it. (Additional permissions may be written to require their own
removal in certain cases when you modify the work.) You may place
additional permissions on material, added by you to a covered work,
for which you have or can give appropriate copyright permission.
-</p>
-<p>Notwithstanding any other provision of this License, for material you
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Notwithstanding any other provision of this License, for material you
add to a covered work, you may (if authorized by the copyright holders
of that material) supplement the terms of this License with terms:
-</p>
-<ol><li>
-Disclaiming warranty or limiting liability differently from the terms
+ </p>
+ <ol>
+ <li>
+ Disclaiming warranty or limiting liability differently from the terms
of sections 15 and 16 of this License; or
-
-</li><li>
-Requiring preservation of specified reasonable legal notices or author
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ Requiring preservation of specified reasonable legal notices or author
attributions in that material or in the Appropriate Legal Notices
displayed by works containing it; or
-
-</li><li>
-Prohibiting misrepresentation of the origin of that material, or
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ Prohibiting misrepresentation of the origin of that material, or
requiring that modified versions of such material be marked in
reasonable ways as different from the original version; or
-
-</li><li>
-Limiting the use for publicity purposes of names of licensors or
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ Limiting the use for publicity purposes of names of licensors or
authors of the material; or
-
-</li><li>
-<a name="index-trademarks-and_002for-trademark-law-2"></a>
-Declining to grant rights under trademark law for use of some trade
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ <a name="index-trademarks-and_002for-trademark-law-2">
+ </a>
+ Declining to grant rights under trademark law for use of some trade
names, trademarks, or service marks; or
-
-</li><li>
-Requiring indemnification of licensors and authors of that material by
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ Requiring indemnification of licensors and authors of that material by
anyone who conveys the material (or modified versions of it) with
contractual assumptions of liability to the recipient, for any
liability that these contractual assumptions directly impose on those
licensors and authors.
-</li></ol><p>All other non-permissive additional terms are considered “further
+ </li>
+ </ol>
+ <p>
+ All other non-permissive additional terms are considered “further
restrictions” within the meaning of section 10. If the Program as you
received it, or any part of it, contains a notice stating that it is
governed by this License along with a term that is a further
@@ -475,48 +551,62 @@ a further restriction but permits relicensing or
conveying under this
License, you may add to a covered work material governed by the terms
of that license document, provided that the further restriction does
not survive such relicensing or conveying.
-</p>
-<p>If you add terms to a covered work in accord with this section, you
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ If you add terms to a covered work in accord with this section, you
must place, in the relevant source files, a statement of the
additional terms that apply to those files, or a notice indicating
where to find the applicable terms.
-</p>
-<p>Additional terms, permissive or non-permissive, may be stated in the
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Additional terms, permissive or non-permissive, may be stated in the
form of a separately written license, or stated as exceptions; the
above requirements apply either way.
-</p>
-</li><li> <strong>Termination.</strong>
-
-<p>You may not propagate or modify a covered work except as expressly
+ </p>
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ <strong>
+ Termination.
+ </strong>
+ <p>
+ You may not propagate or modify a covered work except as expressly
provided under this License. Any attempt otherwise to propagate or
modify it is void, and will automatically terminate your rights under
this License (including any patent licenses granted under the third
paragraph of section 11).
-</p>
-<p>However, if you cease all violation of this License, then your license
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ However, if you cease all violation of this License, then your license
from a particular copyright holder is reinstated (a) provisionally,
unless and until the copyright holder explicitly and finally
terminates your license, and (b) permanently, if the copyright holder
fails to notify you of the violation by some reasonable means prior to
60 days after the cessation.
-</p>
-<p>Moreover, your license from a particular copyright holder is
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Moreover, your license from a particular copyright holder is
reinstated permanently if the copyright holder notifies you of the
violation by some reasonable means, this is the first time you have
received notice of violation of this License (for any work) from that
copyright holder, and you cure the violation prior to 30 days after
your receipt of the notice.
-</p>
-<p>Termination of your rights under this section does not terminate the
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Termination of your rights under this section does not terminate the
licenses of parties who have received copies or rights from you under
this License. If your rights have been terminated and not permanently
reinstated, you do not qualify to receive new licenses for the same
material under section 10.
-</p>
-</li><li> <strong>Acceptance Not Required for Having Copies.</strong>
-
-<a name="index-peer_002dto_002dpeer-2"></a>
-<p>You are not required to accept this License in order to receive or run
+ </p>
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ <strong>
+ Acceptance Not Required for Having Copies.
+ </strong>
+ <a name="index-peer_002dto_002dpeer-2">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ You are not required to accept this License in order to receive or run
a copy of the Program. Ancillary propagation of a covered work
occurring solely as a consequence of using peer-to-peer transmission
to receive a copy likewise does not require acceptance. However,
@@ -524,15 +614,20 @@ nothing other than this License grants you permission to
propagate or
modify any covered work. These actions infringe copyright if you do
not accept this License. Therefore, by modifying or propagating a
covered work, you indicate your acceptance of this License to do so.
-</p>
-</li><li> <strong>Automatic Licensing of Downstream Recipients.</strong>
-
-<p>Each time you convey a covered work, the recipient automatically
+ </p>
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ <strong>
+ Automatic Licensing of Downstream Recipients.
+ </strong>
+ <p>
+ Each time you convey a covered work, the recipient automatically
receives a license from the original licensors, to run, modify and
propagate that work, subject to this License. You are not responsible
for enforcing compliance by third parties with this License.
-</p>
-<p>An “entity transaction” is a transaction transferring control of an
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ An “entity transaction” is a transaction transferring control of an
organization, or substantially all assets of one, or subdividing an
organization, or merging organizations. If propagation of a covered
work results from an entity transaction, each party to that
@@ -541,24 +636,32 @@ licenses to the work the party’s predecessor in interest
had or could
give under the previous paragraph, plus a right to possession of the
Corresponding Source of the work from the predecessor in interest, if
the predecessor has it or can get it with reasonable efforts.
-</p>
-<p>You may not impose any further restrictions on the exercise of the
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ You may not impose any further restrictions on the exercise of the
rights granted or affirmed under this License. For example, you may
not impose a license fee, royalty, or other charge for exercise of
rights granted under this License, and you may not initiate litigation
(including a cross-claim or counterclaim in a lawsuit) alleging that
any patent claim is infringed by making, using, selling, offering for
sale, or importing the Program or any portion of it.
-</p>
-</li><li> <strong>Patents.</strong>
-
-<a name="index-GPL_002c-patent-license"></a>
-<a name="index-patents_002c-GPL-version-3-and-2"></a>
-<p>A “contributor” is a copyright holder who authorizes use under this
+ </p>
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ <strong>
+ Patents.
+ </strong>
+ <a name="index-GPL_002c-patent-license">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-patents_002c-GPL-version-3-and-2">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ A “contributor” is a copyright holder who authorizes use under this
License of the Program or a work on which the Program is based. The
work thus licensed is called the contributor’s “contributor version”.
-</p>
-<p>A contributor’s “essential patent claims” are all patent claims owned
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ A contributor’s “essential patent claims” are all patent claims owned
or controlled by the contributor, whether already acquired or
hereafter acquired, that would be infringed by some manner, permitted
by this License, of making, using, or selling its contributor version,
@@ -567,20 +670,23 @@ consequence of further modification of the contributor
version. For
purposes of this definition, “control” includes the right to grant
patent sublicenses in a manner consistent with the requirements of
this License.
-</p>
-<p>Each contributor grants you a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Each contributor grants you a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free
patent license under the contributor’s essential patent claims, to
make, use, sell, offer for sale, import and otherwise run, modify and
propagate the contents of its contributor version.
-</p>
-<p>In the following three paragraphs, a “patent license” is any express
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ In the following three paragraphs, a “patent license” is any express
agreement or commitment, however denominated, not to enforce a patent
(such as an express permission to practice a patent or covenant not to
sue for patent infringement). To “grant” such a patent license to a
party means to make such an agreement or commitment not to enforce a
patent against the party.
-</p>
-<p>If you convey a covered work, knowingly relying on a patent license,
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ If you convey a covered work, knowingly relying on a patent license,
and the Corresponding Source of the work is not available for anyone
to copy, free of charge and under the terms of this License, through a
publicly available network server or other readily accessible means,
@@ -593,16 +699,18 @@ actual knowledge that, but for the patent license, your
conveying the
covered work in a country, or your recipient’s use of the covered work
in a country, would infringe one or more identifiable patents in that
country that you have reason to believe are valid.
-</p>
-<p>If, pursuant to or in connection with a single transaction or
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ If, pursuant to or in connection with a single transaction or
arrangement, you convey, or propagate by procuring conveyance of, a
covered work, and grant a patent license to some of the parties
receiving the covered work authorizing them to use, propagate, modify
or convey a specific copy of the covered work, then the patent license
you grant is automatically extended to all recipients of the covered
work and works based on it.
-</p>
-<p>A patent license is “discriminatory” if it does not include within the
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ A patent license is “discriminatory” if it does not include within the
scope of its coverage, prohibits the exercise of, or is conditioned on
the non-exercise of one or more of the rights that are specifically
granted under this License. You may not convey a covered work if you
@@ -616,19 +724,29 @@ you (or copies made from those copies), or (b) primarily
for and in
connection with specific products or compilations that contain the
covered work, unless you entered into that arrangement, or that patent
license was granted, prior to 28 March 2007.
-</p>
-<p>Nothing in this License shall be construed as excluding or limiting
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Nothing in this License shall be construed as excluding or limiting
any implied license or other defenses to infringement that may
otherwise be available to you under applicable patent law.
-<a name="index-GPL_002c-patent-license-1"></a>
-<a name="index-patents_002c-GPL-version-3-and-3"></a>
-</p>
-</li><li> <strong>No Surrender of Others’ Freedom.</strong>
-
-<a name="index-GPL_002c-use-with-GNU-Affero-General-Public-License"></a>
-<a name="index-Affero-General-Public-License-_0028AGPL_0029_002c-GNU"></a>
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Affero-General-Public-License-_0028AGPL_0029"></a>
-<p>If conditions are imposed on you (whether by court order, agreement or
+ <a name="index-GPL_002c-patent-license-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-patents_002c-GPL-version-3-and-3">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ <strong>
+ No Surrender of Others’ Freedom.
+ </strong>
+ <a name="index-GPL_002c-use-with-GNU-Affero-General-Public-License">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Affero-General-Public-License-_0028AGPL_0029_002c-GNU">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Affero-General-Public-License-_0028AGPL_0029">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ If conditions are imposed on you (whether by court order, agreement or
otherwise) that contradict the conditions of this License, they do not
excuse you from the conditions of this License. If you cannot convey
a covered work so as to satisfy simultaneously your obligations under
@@ -638,10 +756,14 @@ to terms that obligate you to collect a royalty for
further conveying
from those to whom you convey the Program, the only way you could
satisfy both those terms and this License would be to refrain entirely
from conveying the Program.
-</p>
-</li><li> <strong>Use with the GNU Affero General Public License.</strong>
-
-<p>Notwithstanding any other provision of this License, you have
+ </p>
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ <strong>
+ Use with the GNU Affero General Public License.
+ </strong>
+ <p>
+ Notwithstanding any other provision of this License, you have
permission to link or combine any covered work with a work licensed
under version 3 of the GNU Affero General Public License into a single
combined work, and to convey the resulting work. The terms of this
@@ -649,15 +771,20 @@ License will continue to apply to the part which is the
covered work,
but the special requirements of the GNU Affero General Public License,
section 13, concerning interaction through a network will apply to the
combination as such.
-</p>
-</li><li> <strong>Revised Versions of this License.</strong>
-
-<p>The Free Software Foundation may publish revised and/or new versions
+ </p>
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ <strong>
+ Revised Versions of this License.
+ </strong>
+ <p>
+ The Free Software Foundation may publish revised and/or new versions
of the GNU General Public License from time to time. Such new
versions will be similar in spirit to the present version, but may
differ in detail to address new problems or concerns.
-</p>
-<p>Each version is given a distinguishing version number. If the Program
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Each version is given a distinguishing version number. If the Program
specifies that a certain numbered version of the GNU General Public
License “or any later version” applies to it, you have the option of
following the terms and conditions either of that numbered version or
@@ -665,20 +792,26 @@ of any later version published by the Free Software
Foundation. If
the Program does not specify a version number of the GNU General
Public License, you may choose any version ever published by the Free
Software Foundation.
-</p>
-<p>If the Program specifies that a proxy can decide which future versions
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ If the Program specifies that a proxy can decide which future versions
of the GNU General Public License can be used, that proxy’s public
statement of acceptance of a version permanently authorizes you to
choose that version for the Program.
-</p>
-<p>Later license versions may give you additional or different
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Later license versions may give you additional or different
permissions. However, no additional obligations are imposed on any
author or copyright holder as a result of your choosing to follow a
later version.
-</p>
-</li><li> <strong>Disclaimer of Warranty.</strong>
-
-<p>THERE IS NO WARRANTY FOR THE PROGRAM, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY
+ </p>
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ <strong>
+ Disclaimer of Warranty.
+ </strong>
+ <p>
+ THERE IS NO WARRANTY FOR THE PROGRAM, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY
APPLICABLE LAW. EXCEPT WHEN OTHERWISE STATED IN WRITING THE COPYRIGHT
HOLDERS AND/OR OTHER PARTIES PROVIDE THE PROGRAM “AS IS” WITHOUT
WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING, BUT NOT
@@ -687,10 +820,14 @@ A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. THE ENTIRE RISK AS TO THE QUALITY
AND
PERFORMANCE OF THE PROGRAM IS WITH YOU. SHOULD THE PROGRAM PROVE
DEFECTIVE, YOU ASSUME THE COST OF ALL NECESSARY SERVICING, REPAIR OR
CORRECTION.
-</p>
-</li><li> <strong>Limitation of Liability.</strong>
-
-<p>IN NO EVENT UNLESS REQUIRED BY APPLICABLE LAW OR AGREED TO IN WRITING
+ </p>
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ <strong>
+ Limitation of Liability.
+ </strong>
+ <p>
+ IN NO EVENT UNLESS REQUIRED BY APPLICABLE LAW OR AGREED TO IN WRITING
WILL ANY COPYRIGHT HOLDER, OR ANY OTHER PARTY WHO MODIFIES AND/OR
CONVEYS THE PROGRAM AS PERMITTED ABOVE, BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR DAMAGES,
INCLUDING ANY GENERAL, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES
@@ -699,34 +836,52 @@ NOT LIMITED TO LOSS OF DATA OR DATA BEING RENDERED
INACCURATE OR
LOSSES SUSTAINED BY YOU OR THIRD PARTIES OR A FAILURE OF THE PROGRAM
TO OPERATE WITH ANY OTHER PROGRAMS), EVEN IF SUCH HOLDER OR OTHER
PARTY HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES.
-</p>
-</li><li> <strong>Interpretation of Sections 15 and 16.</strong>
-
-<p>If the disclaimer of warranty and limitation of liability provided
+ </p>
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ <strong>
+ Interpretation of Sections 15 and 16.
+ </strong>
+ <p>
+ If the disclaimer of warranty and limitation of liability provided
above cannot be given local legal effect according to their terms,
reviewing courts shall apply local law that most closely approximates
an absolute waiver of all civil liability in connection with the
Program, unless a warranty or assumption of liability accompanies a
copy of the Program in return for a fee.
-</p>
-</li></ol><a name="END-OF-TERMS-AND-CONDITIONS"></a>
-<h2 class="heading"> END OF TERMS AND CONDITIONS </h2>
-
-<a name="How-to-Apply-These-Terms-to-Your-New-Programs"></a>
-<h2 class="heading"> How to Apply These Terms to Your New Programs </h2>
-
-<a name="index-development_002c-applying-GPL"></a>
-<p>If you develop a new program, and you want it to be of the greatest
+ </p>
+ </li>
+ </ol>
+ <a name="END-OF-TERMS-AND-CONDITIONS">
+ </a>
+ <h2 class="heading">
+ END OF TERMS AND CONDITIONS
+ </h2>
+ <a name="How-to-Apply-These-Terms-to-Your-New-Programs">
+ </a>
+ <h2 class="heading">
+ How to Apply These Terms to Your New Programs
+ </h2>
+ <a name="index-development_002c-applying-GPL">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ If you develop a new program, and you want it to be of the greatest
possible use to the public, the best way to achieve this is to make it
free software which everyone can redistribute and change under these
terms.
-</p>
-<p>To do so, attach the following notices to the program. It is safest
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ To do so, attach the following notices to the program. It is safest
to attach them to the start of each source file to most effectively
state the exclusion of warranty; and each file should have at least
the “copyright” line and a pointer to where the full notice is found.
-</p>
-<table><tr><td> </td><td><pre class="smallexample"><var>one line to give the
program's name and a brief idea of what it does.</var>
+ </p>
+ <table>
+ <tr>
+ <td>
+ </td>
+ <td>
+ <pre class="smallexample"><var>one line to give the program's name and a
brief idea of what it does.</var>
Copyright (C) <var>year</var> <var>name of author</var>
This program is free software: you can redistribute it and/or modify
@@ -741,33 +896,71 @@ General Public License for more details.
You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
along with this program. If not, see <a
href="http://www.gnu.org/licenses/";>http://www.gnu.org/licenses/</a>.
-</pre></td></tr></table><p>Also add information on how to contact you by
electronic and paper mail.
-</p>
-<p>If the program does terminal interaction, make it output a short
+</pre>
+ </td>
+ </tr>
+ </table>
+ <p>
+ Also add information on how to contact you by electronic and paper mail.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ If the program does terminal interaction, make it output a short
notice like this when it starts in an interactive mode:
-</p>
-<table><tr><td> </td><td><pre class="smallexample"><var>program</var>
Copyright (C) <var>year</var> <var>name of author</var>
+ </p>
+ <table>
+ <tr>
+ <td>
+ </td>
+ <td>
+ <pre class="smallexample"><var>program</var> Copyright (C) <var>year</var>
<var>name of author</var>
This program comes with ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY;
for details type ‘<samp>show w</samp>’. This is free software,
and you are welcome to redistribute it under
certain conditions; type ‘<samp>show c</samp>’ for details.
-</pre></td></tr></table><p>The hypothetical commands ‘<samp>show w</samp>’ and
‘<samp>show c</samp>’ should show
+</pre>
+ </td>
+ </tr>
+ </table>
+ <p>
+ The hypothetical commands ‘
+ <samp>
+ show w
+ </samp>
+ ’ and ‘
+ <samp>
+ show c
+ </samp>
+ ’ should show
the appropriate parts of the General Public License. Of course, your
program’s commands might be different; for a GUI interface, you would
use an “about box”.
-</p>
-<p>You should also get your employer (if you work as a programmer) or school,
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ You should also get your employer (if you work as a programmer) or school,
if any, to sign a “copyright disclaimer” for the program, if necessary.
For more information on this, and how to apply and follow the GNU GPL, see
-<a href="http://www.gnu.org/licenses/";>http://www.gnu.org/licenses/</a>.
-</p>
-<p>The GNU General Public License does not permit incorporating your
+ <a href="http://www.gnu.org/licenses/";>
+ http://www.gnu.org/licenses/
+ </a>
+ .
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The GNU General Public License does not permit incorporating your
program into proprietary programs. If your program is a subroutine
library, you may consider it more useful to permit linking proprietary
applications with the library. If this is what you want to do, use
the GNU Lesser General Public License instead of this License. But
-first, please read <a
href="http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/why-not-lgpl.html";>http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/why-not-lgpl.html</a>.
-<a
name="index-General-Public-License-_0028GPL_0029_002c-GNU-_0028see-also-GPL_0029-1"></a>
-<a name="index-GPL-6"></a>
-<a
name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-General-Public-License-_0028GPL_0029-_0028see-also-GPL_0029-1"></a>
-</p><hr size="2"></section></body></html>
+first, please read
+ <a href="http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/why-not-lgpl.html";>
+ http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/why-not-lgpl.html
+ </a>
+ .
+ <a
name="index-General-Public-License-_0028GPL_0029_002c-GNU-_0028see-also-GPL_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GPL-6">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-General-Public-License-_0028GPL_0029-_0028see-also-GPL_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <hr size="2"/>
+</section>
diff --git a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_29.html
b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_29.html
index 0d7c19b..f45058f 100644
--- a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_29.html
+++ b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_29.html
@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
-<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/loose.dtd";>
-<html><!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
+<!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
Free Software Foundation
@@ -19,49 +18,35 @@ ISBN 978-0-9831592-0-9
Cover design by Rob Myers.
Cover photograph by Peter Hinely.
- --><!-- Created on February 18, 2016 by texi2html 1.82
-texi2html was written by:
- Lionel Cons <address@hidden> (original author)
- Karl Berry <address@hidden>
- Olaf Bachmann <address@hidden>
- and many others.
-Maintained by: Many creative people.
-Send bugs and suggestions to <address@hidden>
---><head><title>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 29. Why Upgrade to
GPLv3</title><meta name="description" content="This is the second edition of
Richard Stallman's collection of essays."><meta name="keywords" content="Free
Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 29. Why Upgrade to GPLv3"><meta
name="resource-type" content="document"><meta name="distribution"
content="global"><meta name="Generator" content="texi2html 1.82"><meta
http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">< [...]
-<!--
-a.summary-letter {text-decoration: none}
-blockquote.smallquotation {font-size: smaller}
-pre.display {font-family: serif}
-pre.format {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-comment {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-preformatted {font-family: serif}
-pre.smalldisplay {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallexample {font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallformat {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smalllisp {font-size: smaller}
-span.roman {font-family:serif; font-weight:normal;}
-span.sansserif {font-family:sans-serif; font-weight:normal;}
-ul.toc {list-style: none}
--->
-</style><link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
href="../static/web-common/style.css"></head><body lang="en" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
text="#000000" link="#0000FF" vlink="#800080" alink="#FF0000" class="article">
+ -->
-<a name="Why-V3"></a>
-<header><div id="logo"><a href="/"><img src="../static/gnu.svg" height="100"
width="100"></a></div><h1 class="book-title">Free Software, Free Society, 2nd
ed.</h1></header><section id="main"><a name="Why-Upgrade-to-GPLv3"></a>
-<h1 class="chapter"> 29. Why Upgrade to GPLv3 </h1>
-
-<a name="index-patents_002c-GPL-version-3-and-4"></a>
-<a name="index-GPL_002c-version-3_002c-why-upgrade-to"></a>
-<a name="index-call-to-action_002c-upgrade-to-GPL-version-3"></a>
-<p>Version 3 of the GNU General Public License (GNU GPL) has been released,
enabling free software packages to upgrade from GPL version 2. This article
explains why upgrading the license is important.
-</p>
-<p>First of all, it is important to note that upgrading is a choice. GPL
+<section id="main">
+ <a name="Why-Upgrade-to-GPLv3">
+ </a>
+ <h1 class="chapter">
+ 29. Why Upgrade to GPLv3
+ </h1>
+ <a name="index-patents_002c-GPL-version-3-and-4">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GPL_002c-version-3_002c-why-upgrade-to">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-upgrade-to-GPL-version-3">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Version 3 of the GNU General Public License (GNU GPL) has been released,
enabling free software packages to upgrade from GPL version 2. This article
explains why upgrading the license is important.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ First of all, it is important to note that upgrading is a choice. GPL
version 2 will remain a valid license, and no disaster will happen if
some programs remain under GPLv2 while others advance to GPLv3. These
two licenses are incompatible, but that isn’t a fundamental problem.
-</p>
-<a name="index-copyleft_002c-GPL-and-2"></a>
-<a name="index-GPL_002c-version-3_002c-compatibility"></a>
-<p>When we say that GPLv2 and GPLv3 are incompatible, it means there is
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-copyleft_002c-GPL-and-2">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GPL_002c-version-3_002c-compatibility">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ When we say that GPLv2 and GPLv3 are incompatible, it means there is
no legal way to combine code under GPLv2 with code under GPLv3 in a
single program. This is because both GPLv2 and GPLv3 are copyleft
licenses: each of them says, “If you include code under this license
@@ -69,110 +54,147 @@ in a larger program, the larger program must be under
this license
too.” There is no way to make them compatible. We could add a
GPLv2-compatibility clause to GPLv3, but it wouldn’t do the job,
because GPLv2 would need a similar clause.
-</p>
-<p>Fortunately, license incompatibility matters only when you want to
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Fortunately, license incompatibility matters only when you want to
link, merge or combine code from two different programs into a single
program. There is no problem in having GPLv3-covered and
GPLv2-covered programs side by side in an operating system. For
-instance, the
-<a name="index-TeX-4"></a>
-TeX license and the
-<a name="index-Apache-License"></a>
-Apache license are incompatible with
-GPLv2, but that doesn’t stop us from running TeX and
-<a name="index-Apache"></a>
-Apache in the
-same system with Linux,
-<a name="index-BASH-_0028Bourne-Again-Shell_0029_002c-GNU-4"></a>
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-BASH-_0028Bourne-Again-Shell_0029-4"></a>
-Bash and
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GCC-5"></a>
-GCC. This is because they are all
+instance, the
+ <a name="index-TeX-4">
+ </a>
+ TeX license and the
+ <a name="index-Apache-License">
+ </a>
+ Apache license are incompatible with
+GPLv2, but that doesn’t stop us from running TeX and
+ <a name="index-Apache">
+ </a>
+ Apache in the
+same system with Linux,
+ <a name="index-BASH-_0028Bourne-Again-Shell_0029_002c-GNU-4">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-BASH-_0028Bourne-Again-Shell_0029-4">
+ </a>
+ Bash and
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GCC-5">
+ </a>
+ GCC. This is because they are all
separate programs. Likewise, if Bash and GCC move to GPLv3, while
Linux remains under GPLv2, there is no conflict.
-</p>
-<p>Keeping a program under GPLv2 won’t create problems. The reason to
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Keeping a program under GPLv2 won’t create problems. The reason to
migrate is because of the existing problems that GPLv3 will address.
-</p>
-<a name="index-tivoization-2"></a>
-<p>One major danger that GPLv3 will block is tivoization. Tivoization
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-tivoization-2">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ One major danger that GPLv3 will block is tivoization. Tivoization
means certain “appliances” (which have computers inside)
-contain
-<a name="index-GPL_002dcovered-software-_0028see-also-software_0029-3"></a>
-<a
name="index-GPL_002c-GPL_002dcovered-software-_0028see-also-software_0029-3"></a>
-GPL-covered software that you can’t effectively change, because the
+contain
+ <a name="index-GPL_002dcovered-software-_0028see-also-software_0029-3">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-GPL_002c-GPL_002dcovered-software-_0028see-also-software_0029-3">
+ </a>
+ GPL-covered software that you can’t effectively change, because the
appliance shuts down if it detects modified software. The usual
motive for tivoization is that the software has features the
manufacturer knows people will want to change, and aims
to stop people from changing them. The manufacturers of
these computers take advantage of the freedom that free software
provides, but they don’t let you do likewise.
-</p>
-<p>Some argue that competition between appliances in a free market should
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Some argue that competition between appliances in a free market should
suffice to keep nasty features to a low level. Perhaps competition
alone would avoid arbitrary, pointless misfeatures like “Must shut
down between 1pm and 5pm every Tuesday,” but even so, a choice of
-masters isn’t freedom. Freedom means <em>you</em> control what your software
+masters isn’t freedom. Freedom means
+ <em>
+ you
+ </em>
+ control what your software
does, not merely that you can beg or threaten someone else who decides
for you.
-</p>
-<p>In the crucial area of
-<a name="index-DRM_002c-GPL-version-3-and"></a>
-<a
name="index-DRM_002c-call-it-_0060_0060Digital-Restrictions-Management_0027_0027-3"></a>
-<a name="index-DMCA_002c-GPL-version-3-and"></a>
-Digital Restrictions Management (DRM)—nasty features
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ In the crucial area of
+ <a name="index-DRM_002c-GPL-version-3-and">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-DRM_002c-call-it-_0060_0060Digital-Restrictions-Management_0027_0027-3">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-DMCA_002c-GPL-version-3-and">
+ </a>
+ Digital Restrictions Management (DRM)—nasty features
designed to restrict your use of the data in your
computer—competition is no help, because relevant competition is
forbidden. Under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act and similar
laws, it is illegal, in the US and many other countries, to distribute
DVD players unless they restrict the user according to the official
-rules of the DVD conspiracy (its web site is <a
href="http://www.dvdcca.org/";>http://www.dvdcca.org/</a>,
+rules of the DVD conspiracy (its web site is
+ <a href="http://www.dvdcca.org/";>
+ http://www.dvdcca.org/
+ </a>
+ ,
but the rules do not seem to be published there). The public can’t
reject DRM by buying non-DRM players because none are available. No
matter how many products you can choose from, they all have equivalent
digital handcuffs.
-</p>
-<p>GPLv3 ensures you are free to remove the handcuffs. It doesn’t forbid
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ GPLv3 ensures you are free to remove the handcuffs. It doesn’t forbid
DRM, or any kind of feature. It places no limits on the substantive
functionality you can add to a program, or remove from it. Rather, it
makes sure that you are just as free to remove nasty features as the
distributor of your copy was to add them. Tivoization is the way they
deny you that freedom; to protect your freedom, GPLv3 forbids
tivoization.
-</p>
-<p>The ban on tivoization applies to any product whose use by consumers is to
be expected, even occasionally. GPLv3 tolerates tivoization
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The ban on tivoization applies to any product whose use by consumers is to
be expected, even occasionally. GPLv3 tolerates tivoization
only for products that are almost exclusively meant for businesses and
organizations.
-<a name="index-tivoization-3"></a>
-</p>
-<a
name="index-Novell-_0028see-also-patents_002c-GPL_002c-and-Microsoft_0029"></a>
-<a name="index-patents_002c-Novell_002dMicrosoft-pact"></a>
-<a name="index-Microsoft_002c-Novell_002dMicrosoft-pact"></a>
-<a name="index-GPL_002c-version-3_002c-limited-patent-protection"></a>
-<p>Another threat that GPLv3 resists is that of patent deals like the
+ <a name="index-tivoization-3">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-Novell-_0028see-also-patents_002c-GPL_002c-and-Microsoft_0029">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-patents_002c-Novell_002dMicrosoft-pact">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Microsoft_002c-Novell_002dMicrosoft-pact">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GPL_002c-version-3_002c-limited-patent-protection">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Another threat that GPLv3 resists is that of patent deals like the
Novell-Microsoft pact. Microsoft wants to use its thousands of
patents to make users pay Microsoft for the privilege of running
GNU/Linux, and made this pact to try to achieve that. The deal offers
rather limited protection from Microsoft patents to Novell’s customers.
-</p>
-<p>Microsoft made a few mistakes in the Novell-Microsoft deal, and GPLv3
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Microsoft made a few mistakes in the Novell-Microsoft deal, and GPLv3
is designed to turn them against Microsoft, extending that limited
patent protection to the whole community. In order to take advantage
of this protection, programs need to use GPLv3.
-</p>
-<p>Microsoft’s lawyers are not stupid, and next time they may manage to
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Microsoft’s lawyers are not stupid, and next time they may manage to
avoid those mistakes. GPLv3 therefore says they don’t get a “next
time.” Releasing a program under GPL version 3 protects it from
Microsoft’s future attempts to make redistributors collect Microsoft
royalties from the program’s users.
-</p>
-<p>GPLv3 also provides users with explicit patent protection from
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ GPLv3 also provides users with explicit patent protection from
the program’s contributors and redistributors. With GPLv2, users rely
on an implicit patent license to make sure that the company which
provided them a copy won’t sue them, or the people they redistribute
copies to, for patent infringement.
-</p>
-<p>The explicit patent license in GPLv3 does not go as far as we might
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The explicit patent license in GPLv3 does not go as far as we might
have liked. Ideally, we would make everyone who redistributes
GPL-covered code give up all software patents, along with everyone
who does not redistribute GPL-covered code, because there should be
@@ -184,42 +206,54 @@ thousands of ideas, so it is no surprise if they
implement ideas
covered by hundreds of patents. Megacorporations collect thousands of
patents, and use those patents to bully smaller developers. Patents
already obstruct free software development.
-</p>
-<p>The only way to make software development safe is to abolish software
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The only way to make software development safe is to abolish software
patents, and we aim to achieve this some day. But we cannot do this
through a software license. Any program, free or not, can be killed
by a software patent in the hands of an unrelated party, and the
program’s license cannot prevent that. Only court decisions or
changes in patent law can make software development safe from patents.
If we tried to do this with GPLv3, it would fail.
-</p>
-<p>Therefore, GPLv3 seeks to limit and channel the danger. In
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Therefore, GPLv3 seeks to limit and channel the danger. In
particular, we have tried to save free software from a fate worse than
death: to be made effectively proprietary, through patents. The
explicit patent license of GPLv3 makes sure companies that use the GPL
to give users the four freedoms cannot turn around and use their
patents to tell some users, “That doesn’t include you.”
It also stops them from colluding with other patent holders to do this.
-</p>
-<a name="index-BitTorrent"></a>
-<a name="index-Apache-License-1"></a>
-<p>Further advantages of GPLv3 include better internationalization, gentler
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-BitTorrent">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Apache-License-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Further advantages of GPLv3 include better internationalization, gentler
termination, support for BitTorrent, and compatibility with the Apache
license. All in all, plenty of reason to upgrade.
-</p>
-<p>Change is unlikely to cease once GPLv3 is released. If new threats to
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Change is unlikely to cease once GPLv3 is released. If new threats to
users’ freedom develop, we will have to develop GPL version 4. It is
important to make sure that programs will have no trouble upgrading to
GPLv4 if and when we write one.
-</p>
-<p>One way to do this is to release a program under “GPL version 3 or any
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ One way to do this is to release a program under “GPL version 3 or any
later version.” Another way is for all the contributors to a program
to state a proxy who can decide on upgrading to future GPL versions.
The third way is for all the contributors to assign copyright to one
designated copyright holder, who will be in a position to upgrade the
license version. One way or another, programs should provide this
flexibility for future GPL versions.
-<a name="index-GPL_002c-version-3_002c-why-upgrade-to-1"></a>
-<a name="index-call-to-action_002c-upgrade-to-GPL-version-3-1"></a>
-<a name="index-patents_002c-GPL-version-3-and-5"></a>
-</p><hr size="2"></section></body></html>
+ <a name="index-GPL_002c-version-3_002c-why-upgrade-to-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-upgrade-to-GPL-version-3-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-patents_002c-GPL-version-3-and-5">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <hr size="2"/>
+</section>
diff --git a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_3.html
b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_3.html
index d760133..59913a9 100644
--- a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_3.html
+++ b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_3.html
@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
-<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/loose.dtd";>
-<html><!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
+<!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
Free Software Foundation
@@ -19,86 +18,103 @@ ISBN 978-0-9831592-0-9
Cover design by Rob Myers.
Cover photograph by Peter Hinely.
- --><!-- Created on February 18, 2016 by texi2html 1.82
-texi2html was written by:
- Lionel Cons <address@hidden> (original author)
- Karl Berry <address@hidden>
- Olaf Bachmann <address@hidden>
- and many others.
-Maintained by: Many creative people.
-Send bugs and suggestions to <address@hidden>
---><head><title>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 3. The Initial
Announcement of the GNU Operating System</title><meta name="description"
content="This is the second edition of Richard Stallman's collection of
essays."><meta name="keywords" content="Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.:
3. The Initial Announcement of the GNU Operating System"><meta
name="resource-type" content="document"><meta name="distribution"
content="global"><meta name="Generator" content="texi2html 1.82"><meta [...]
-<!--
-a.summary-letter {text-decoration: none}
-blockquote.smallquotation {font-size: smaller}
-pre.display {font-family: serif}
-pre.format {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-comment {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-preformatted {font-family: serif}
-pre.smalldisplay {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallexample {font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallformat {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smalllisp {font-size: smaller}
-span.roman {font-family:serif; font-weight:normal;}
-span.sansserif {font-family:sans-serif; font-weight:normal;}
-ul.toc {list-style: none}
--->
-</style><link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
href="../static/web-common/style.css"></head><body lang="en" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
text="#000000" link="#0000FF" vlink="#800080" alink="#FF0000" class="article">
+ -->
-<a name="Initial-Announcement"></a>
-<header><div id="logo"><a href="/"><img src="../static/gnu.svg" height="100"
width="100"></a></div><h1 class="book-title">Free Software, Free Society, 2nd
ed.</h1></header><section id="main"><a
name="The-Initial-Announcement-of-the-GNU-Operating-System"></a>
-<h1 class="chapter"> 3. The Initial Announcement of the GNU Operating System
</h1>
-
-<p>This is the original announcement of the GNU Project, posted by
+<section id="main">
+ <a name="The-Initial-Announcement-of-the-GNU-Operating-System">
+ </a>
+ <h1 class="chapter">
+ 3. The Initial Announcement of the GNU Operating System
+ </h1>
+ <p>
+ This is the original announcement of the GNU Project, posted by
Richard Stallman on 27 September 1983.
-</p>
-<p>The actual history of the GNU Project differs in many ways from
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The actual history of the GNU Project differs in many ways from
this initial plan. For example, the beginning was delayed until
January 1984. Several of the philosophical concepts of free software
were not clarified until a few years later.
-</p>
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-initial-announcement"></a>
-<a name="index-MIT-1"></a>
-<a name="index-Unix-compatibility_002c-announcement-of"></a>
-<a
name="index-RMS_002c-Richard-Stallman_002c-often-referred-to-as-_0028see-also-Stallman_0029"></a>
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-operating-system-parts-3"></a>
-<a name="index-Empire-game"></a>
-<a name="index-games_002c-Empire"></a>
-<a name="index-C-programs"></a>
-<a name="index-C-compiler"></a>
-<a name="index-yacc"></a>
-<p>
-<tt>
-From address@hidden<br>
-From: <code>address@hidden</code><br>
-Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards,net.usoft<br>
-Subject: new Unix implementation<br>
-Date: Tue, 27-Sep-83 12:35:59 EST<br>
-Organization: MIT AI Lab, Cambridge, MA
-</tt></p>
-<p>Free Unix!
-</p>
-<p>Starting this Thanksgiving I am going to write a complete
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-initial-announcement">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-MIT-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Unix-compatibility_002c-announcement-of">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-RMS_002c-Richard-Stallman_002c-often-referred-to-as-_0028see-also-Stallman_0029">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-operating-system-parts-3">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Empire-game">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-games_002c-Empire">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-C-programs">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-C-compiler">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-yacc">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ <tt>
+ From address@hidden
+ <br>
+ From:
+ <code>
+ address@hidden
+ </code>
+ <br>
+ Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards,net.usoft
+ <br>
+ Subject: new Unix implementation
+ <br>
+ Date: Tue, 27-Sep-83 12:35:59 EST
+ <br>
+ Organization: MIT AI Lab, Cambridge, MA
+ </br>
+ </br>
+ </br>
+ </br>
+ </br>
+ </tt>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Free Unix!
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Starting this Thanksgiving I am going to write a complete
Unix-compatible software system called GNU (for Gnu’s Not Unix), and
-give it away free<a name="DOCF11" href="#FOOT11">(11)</a> to everyone who can
use it. Contributions of
+give it away free
+ <a href="#FOOT11" name="DOCF11">
+ (11)
+ </a>
+ to everyone who can use it. Contributions of
time, money, programs and equipment are greatly needed.
-</p>
-<p>To begin with, GNU will be a kernel plus all the utilities needed to
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ To begin with, GNU will be a kernel plus all the utilities needed to
write and run C programs: editor, shell, C compiler, linker,
assembler, and a few other things. After this we will add a text
formatter, a YACC, an Empire game, a spreadsheet, and hundreds of
other things. We hope to supply, eventually, everything useful that
normally comes with a Unix system, and anything else useful, including
on-line and hardcopy documentation.
-</p>
-
-<a name="index-Chaosnet-_0028see-also-MIT_0029"></a>
-<a name="index-MIT_002c-Chaosnet"></a>
-<a name="index-UUCP"></a>
-<a name="index-Lisp_002c-programs"></a>
-<a name="index-Lisp_002c-Lisp_002dbased-window-system"></a>
-<a name="index-MIT_002c-Chaosnet-1"></a>
-<p>GNU will be able to run Unix programs, but will not be identical to
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-Chaosnet-_0028see-also-MIT_0029">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-MIT_002c-Chaosnet">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-UUCP">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Lisp_002c-programs">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Lisp_002c-Lisp_002dbased-window-system">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-MIT_002c-Chaosnet-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ GNU will be able to run Unix programs, but will not be identical to
Unix. We will make all improvements that are convenient, based on our
experience with other operating systems. In particular, we plan to
have longer filenames, file version numbers, a crashproof file system,
@@ -108,53 +124,74 @@ programs and ordinary Unix programs can share a screen.
Both C and
Lisp will be available as system programming languages. We will have
network software based on MIT’s chaosnet protocol, far superior to
UUCP. We may also have something compatible with UUCP.
-</p>
-<p>Who Am I?
-</p>
-<a name="index-Stallman_002c-Richard-1"></a>
-<a name="index-Emacs_002c-GNU-3"></a>
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Emacs-3"></a>
-<a name="index-MIT_002c-AI-_0028Artificial-Intelligence_0029-Lab-2"></a>
-<a name="index-ITS-_0028Incompatible-Timesharing-System_0029-3"></a>
-<a name="index-Lisp_002c-Lisp-Machine-operating-system"></a>
-<p>I am Richard Stallman, inventor of the original much-imitated EMACS
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Who Am I?
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-Stallman_002c-Richard-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Emacs_002c-GNU-3">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Emacs-3">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-MIT_002c-AI-_0028Artificial-Intelligence_0029-Lab-2">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-ITS-_0028Incompatible-Timesharing-System_0029-3">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Lisp_002c-Lisp-Machine-operating-system">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ I am Richard Stallman, inventor of the original much-imitated EMACS
editor, now at the Artificial Intelligence Lab at MIT. I have worked
extensively on compilers, editors, debuggers, command interpreters,
the Incompatible Timesharing System and the Lisp Machine operating
system. I pioneered terminal-independent display support in ITS. In
addition I have implemented one crashproof file system and two window
systems for Lisp machines.
-</p>
-<p>Why I Must Write GNU
-</p>
-<a name="index-Golden-Rule"></a>
-<a name="index-citizen-values_002c-Golden-Rule"></a>
-<a name="index-nondisclosure-agreements-3"></a>
-<p>I consider that the golden rule requires that if I like a program I
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Why I Must Write GNU
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-Golden-Rule">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-citizen-values_002c-Golden-Rule">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-nondisclosure-agreements-3">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ I consider that the golden rule requires that if I like a program I
must share it with other people who like it. I cannot in good
conscience sign a nondisclosure agreement or a software license
agreement.
-</p>
-<p>So that I can continue to use computers without violating my
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ So that I can continue to use computers without violating my
principles, I have decided to put together a sufficient body of free
software so that I will be able to get along without any software that
is not free.
-</p>
-<p>How You Can Contribute
-</p>
-<a name="index-development_002c-contributions-and-donations-1"></a>
-<a name="index-call-to-action_002c-initial-announcement"></a>
-<p>I am asking computer manufacturers for donations of machines and
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ How You Can Contribute
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-development_002c-contributions-and-donations-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-initial-announcement">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ I am asking computer manufacturers for donations of machines and
money. I’m asking individuals for donations of programs and work.
-</p>
-<p>One computer manufacturer has already offered to provide a
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ One computer manufacturer has already offered to provide a
machine. But we could use more. One consequence you can expect if you
donate machines is that GNU will run on them at an early date. The
machine had better be able to operate in a residential area, and not
require sophisticated cooling or power.
-</p>
-<a name="index-Unix-compatibility_002c-ease-of-contribution-because-of"></a>
-<p>Individual programmers can contribute by writing a compatible
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-Unix-compatibility_002c-ease-of-contribution-because-of">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Individual programmers can contribute by writing a compatible
duplicate of some Unix utility and giving it to me. For most projects,
such part-time distributed work would be very hard to coordinate; the
independently-written parts would not work together. But for the
@@ -162,39 +199,71 @@ particular task of replacing Unix, this problem is
absent. Most
interface specifications are fixed by Unix compatibility. If each
contribution works with the rest of Unix, it will probably work with
the rest of GNU.
-</p>
-<p>If I get donations of money, I may be able to hire a few people full
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ If I get donations of money, I may be able to hire a few people full
or part time. The salary won’t be high, but I’m looking for people for
whom knowing they are helping humanity is as important as money. I
view this as a way of enabling dedicated people to devote their full
energies to working on GNU by sparing them the need to make a living
in another way.
-</p>
-
-<p>For more information, contact me.<br>
-Arpanet mail:<br>
address@hidden
-</p>
-<p>Usenet:<br>
address@hidden
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ For more information, contact me.
+ <br>
+ Arpanet mail:
+ <br>
+ address@hidden
+ </br>
+ </br>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Usenet:
+ <br>
+ address@hidden
address@hidden
-<a name="index-MIT-2"></a>
-</p>
-<p>US Snail:<br>
- Richard Stallman<br>
- 166 Prospect St<br>
- Cambridge, MA 02139
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-initial-announcement-1"></a>
-<a name="index-MIT-3"></a>
-</p>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-<hr><h3>Footnotes</h3>
-<h3><a name="FOOT11" href="#DOCF11">(11)</a></h3>
-<p>The wording here was careless. The
-intention was that nobody would have to pay for <em>permission</em> to
+ <a name="index-MIT-2">
+ </a>
+ </br>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ US Snail:
+ <br>
+ Richard Stallman
+ <br>
+ 166 Prospect St
+ <br>
+ Cambridge, MA 02139
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-initial-announcement-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-MIT-3">
+ </a>
+ </br>
+ </br>
+ </br>
+ </p>
+ <div class="footnote">
+ <hr>
+ <h3>
+ Footnotes
+ </h3>
+ <h3>
+ <a href="#DOCF11" name="FOOT11">
+ (11)
+ </a>
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ The wording here was careless. The
+intention was that nobody would have to pay for
+ <em>
+ permission
+ </em>
+ to
use the GNU system. But the words don’t make this clear, and people
often interpret them as saying that copies of GNU should always be
distributed at little or no charge. That was never the intent.
-</p></div>
-<hr size="2"></section></body></html>
+ </p>
+ </hr>
+ </div>
+ <hr size="2"/>
+</section>
diff --git a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_30.html
b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_30.html
index 37a4e3f..5b635cd 100644
--- a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_30.html
+++ b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_30.html
@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
-<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/loose.dtd";>
-<html><!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
+<!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
Free Software Foundation
@@ -19,159 +18,192 @@ ISBN 978-0-9831592-0-9
Cover design by Rob Myers.
Cover photograph by Peter Hinely.
- --><!-- Created on February 18, 2016 by texi2html 1.82
-texi2html was written by:
- Lionel Cons <address@hidden> (original author)
- Karl Berry <address@hidden>
- Olaf Bachmann <address@hidden>
- and many others.
-Maintained by: Many creative people.
-Send bugs and suggestions to <address@hidden>
---><head><title>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 30. The GNU Lesser
General Public License</title><meta name="description" content="This is the
second edition of Richard Stallman's collection of essays."><meta
name="keywords" content="Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 30. The GNU
Lesser General Public License"><meta name="resource-type"
content="document"><meta name="distribution" content="global"><meta
name="Generator" content="texi2html 1.82"><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" co
[...]
-<!--
-a.summary-letter {text-decoration: none}
-blockquote.smallquotation {font-size: smaller}
-pre.display {font-family: serif}
-pre.format {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-comment {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-preformatted {font-family: serif}
-pre.smalldisplay {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallexample {font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallformat {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smalllisp {font-size: smaller}
-span.roman {font-family:serif; font-weight:normal;}
-span.sansserif {font-family:sans-serif; font-weight:normal;}
-ul.toc {list-style: none}
--->
-</style><link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
href="../static/web-common/style.css"></head><body lang="en" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
text="#000000" link="#0000FF" vlink="#800080" alink="#FF0000" class="article">
+ -->
-<a name="LGPL"></a>
-<header><div id="logo"><a href="/"><img src="../static/gnu.svg" height="100"
width="100"></a></div><h1 class="book-title">Free Software, Free Society, 2nd
ed.</h1></header><section id="main"><a
name="The-GNU-Lesser-General-Public-License"></a>
-<h1 class="chapter"> 30. The GNU Lesser General Public License </h1>
-
-<a
name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Lesser-General-Public-License-_0028LGPL_0029-_0028see-also-LGPL_0029"></a>
-<a
name="index-Lesser-General-Public-License-_0028LGPL_0029_002c-GNU-_0028see-also-LGPL_0029"></a>
-<a name="index-LGPL"></a>
-<p align="center"> Version 3, 29 June 2007
-</p>
-<table><tr><td> </td><td><pre class="display">Copyright © 2007 Free Software
Foundation, Inc. <a href="http://fsf.org/";>http://fsf.org/</a>
+<section id="main">
+ <a name="The-GNU-Lesser-General-Public-License">
+ </a>
+ <h1 class="chapter">
+ 30. The GNU Lesser General Public License
+ </h1>
+ <a
name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Lesser-General-Public-License-_0028LGPL_0029-_0028see-also-LGPL_0029">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-Lesser-General-Public-License-_0028LGPL_0029_002c-GNU-_0028see-also-LGPL_0029">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-LGPL">
+ </a>
+ <p align="center">
+ Version 3, 29 June 2007
+ </p>
+ <table>
+ <tr>
+ <td>
+ </td>
+ <td>
+ <pre class="display">Copyright © 2007 Free Software Foundation, Inc. <a
href="http://fsf.org/";>http://fsf.org/</a>
Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies of this
license document, but changing it is not allowed.
-</pre></td></tr></table><p>This version of the GNU Lesser General Public
License incorporates
+</pre>
+ </td>
+ </tr>
+ </table>
+ <p>
+ This version of the GNU Lesser General Public License incorporates
the terms and conditions of version 3 of the GNU General Public
License, supplemented by the additional permissions listed below.
-</p>
-<ol><li> <strong>Additional Definitions.</strong>
-
-<p>As used herein, “this License” refers to version 3 of the GNU Lesser
+ </p>
+ <ol>
+ <li>
+ <strong>
+ Additional Definitions.
+ </strong>
+ <p>
+ As used herein, “this License” refers to version 3 of the GNU Lesser
General Public License, and the “GNU GPL” refers to version 3 of the GNU
General Public License.
-</p>
-<p>“The Library” refers to a covered work governed by this License,
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ “The Library” refers to a covered work governed by this License,
other than an Application or a Combined Work as defined below.
-</p>
-<p>An “Application” is any work that makes use of an interface provided
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ An “Application” is any work that makes use of an interface provided
by the Library, but which is not otherwise based on the Library.
Defining a subclass of a class defined by the Library is deemed a mode
of using an interface provided by the Library.
-</p>
-<p>A “Combined Work” is a work produced by combining or linking an
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ A “Combined Work” is a work produced by combining or linking an
Application with the Library. The particular version of the Library
with which the Combined Work was made is also called the “Linked
Version”.
-</p>
-<p>The “Minimal Corresponding Source” for a Combined Work means the
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The “Minimal Corresponding Source” for a Combined Work means the
Corresponding Source for the Combined Work, excluding any source code
for portions of the Combined Work that, considered in isolation, are
based on the Application, and not on the Linked Version.
-</p>
-<p>The “Corresponding Application Code” for a Combined Work means the
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The “Corresponding Application Code” for a Combined Work means the
object code and/or source code for the Application, including any data
and utility programs needed for reproducing the Combined Work from the
Application, but excluding the System Libraries of the Combined Work.
-</p>
-</li><li> <strong>Exception to Section 3 of the GNU GPL.</strong>
-
-<p>You may convey a covered work under sections 3 and 4 of this License
+ </p>
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ <strong>
+ Exception to Section 3 of the GNU GPL.
+ </strong>
+ <p>
+ You may convey a covered work under sections 3 and 4 of this License
without being bound by section 3 of the GNU GPL.
-</p>
-</li><li> <strong>Conveying Modified Versions.</strong>
-
-<a name="index-copyleft_002c-modified-versions-6"></a>
-<p>If you modify a copy of the Library, and, in your modifications, a
+ </p>
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ <strong>
+ Conveying Modified Versions.
+ </strong>
+ <a name="index-copyleft_002c-modified-versions-6">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ If you modify a copy of the Library, and, in your modifications, a
facility refers to a function or data to be supplied by an Application
that uses the facility (other than as an argument passed when the
facility is invoked), then you may convey a copy of the modified
version:
-</p>
-<ol><li>
-under this License, provided that you make a good faith effort to
+ </p>
+ <ol>
+ <li>
+ under this License, provided that you make a good faith effort to
ensure that, in the event an Application does not supply the
function or data, the facility still operates, and performs
whatever part of its purpose remains meaningful, or
-
-</li><li>
-under the GNU GPL, with none of the additional permissions of
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ under the GNU GPL, with none of the additional permissions of
this License applicable to that copy.
-</li></ol><a name="index-copyleft_002c-modified-versions-7"></a>
-
-</li><li> <strong>Object Code Incorporating Material from Library Header
Files.</strong>
-
-<p>The object code form of an Application may incorporate material from
+ </li>
+ </ol>
+ <a name="index-copyleft_002c-modified-versions-7">
+ </a>
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ <strong>
+ Object Code Incorporating Material from Library Header Files.
+ </strong>
+ <p>
+ The object code form of an Application may incorporate material from
a header file that is part of the Library. You may convey such object
code under terms of your choice, provided that, if the incorporated
material is not limited to numerical parameters, data structure
layouts and accessors, or small macros, inline functions and templates
(ten or fewer lines in length), you do both of the following:
-</p>
-<ol><li>
-Give prominent notice with each copy of the object code that the
+ </p>
+ <ol>
+ <li>
+ Give prominent notice with each copy of the object code that the
Library is used in it and that the Library and its use are
covered by this License.
-</li><li>
-Accompany the object code with a copy of the GNU GPL and this license
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ Accompany the object code with a copy of the GNU GPL and this license
document.
-</li></ol></li><li> <strong>Combined Works.</strong>
-
-<p>You may convey a Combined Work under terms of your choice that,
+ </li>
+ </ol>
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ <strong>
+ Combined Works.
+ </strong>
+ <p>
+ You may convey a Combined Work under terms of your choice that,
taken together, effectively do not restrict modification of the
portions of the Library contained in the Combined Work and reverse
engineering for debugging such modifications, if you also do each of
the following:
-</p>
-<ol><li>
-Give prominent notice with each copy of the Combined Work that
+ </p>
+ <ol>
+ <li>
+ Give prominent notice with each copy of the Combined Work that
the Library is used in it and that the Library and its use are
covered by this License.
-</li><li>
-Accompany the Combined Work with a copy of the GNU GPL and this license
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ Accompany the Combined Work with a copy of the GNU GPL and this license
document.
-</li><li>
-For a Combined Work that displays copyright notices during
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ For a Combined Work that displays copyright notices during
execution, include the copyright notice for the Library among
these notices, as well as a reference directing the user to the
copies of the GNU GPL and this license document.
-</li><li>
-Do one of the following:
-
-<ol><li>
-Convey the Minimal Corresponding Source under the terms of this
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ Do one of the following:
+ <ol>
+ <li>
+ Convey the Minimal Corresponding Source under the terms of this
License, and the Corresponding Application Code in a form
suitable for, and under terms that permit, the user to
recombine or relink the Application with a modified version of
the Linked Version to produce a modified Combined Work, in the
manner specified by section 6 of the GNU GPL for conveying
Corresponding Source.
-</li><li>
-Use a suitable shared library mechanism for linking with the
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ Use a suitable shared library mechanism for linking with the
Library. A suitable mechanism is one that (a) uses at run time
a copy of the Library already present on the user’s computer
system, and (b) will operate properly with a modified version
of the Library that is interface-compatible with the Linked
Version.
-</li></ol></li><li>
-Provide Installation Information, but only if you would otherwise
+ </li>
+ </ol>
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ Provide Installation Information, but only if you would otherwise
be required to provide such information under section 6 of the
GNU GPL, and only to the extent that such information is
necessary to install and execute a modified version of the
@@ -182,30 +214,45 @@ the Minimal Corresponding Source and Corresponding
Application
Code. If you use option 4d1, you must provide the Installation
Information in the manner specified by section 6 of the GNU GPL
for conveying Corresponding Source.)
-</li></ol></li><li> <strong>Combined Libraries.</strong>
-
-<p>You may place library facilities that are a work based on the
+ </li>
+ </ol>
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ <strong>
+ Combined Libraries.
+ </strong>
+ <p>
+ You may place library facilities that are a work based on the
Library side by side in a single library together with other library
facilities that are not Applications and are not covered by this
License, and convey such a combined library under terms of your
choice, if you do both of the following:
-</p>
-<ol><li>
-Accompany the combined library with a copy of the same work based
+ </p>
+ <ol>
+ <li>
+ Accompany the combined library with a copy of the same work based
on the Library, uncombined with any other library facilities,
conveyed under the terms of this License.
-</li><li>
-Give prominent notice with the combined library that part of it
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ Give prominent notice with the combined library that part of it
is a work based on the Library, and explaining where to find the
accompanying uncombined form of the same work.
-</li></ol></li><li> <strong>Revised Versions of the GNU Lesser General Public
License.</strong>
-
-<p>The Free Software Foundation may publish revised and/or new versions
+ </li>
+ </ol>
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ <strong>
+ Revised Versions of the GNU Lesser General Public License.
+ </strong>
+ <p>
+ The Free Software Foundation may publish revised and/or new versions
of the GNU Lesser General Public License from time to time. Such new
versions will be similar in spirit to the present version, but may
differ in detail to address new problems or concerns.
-</p>
-<p>Each version is given a distinguishing version number. If the
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Each version is given a distinguishing version number. If the
Library as you received it specifies that a certain numbered version
of the GNU Lesser General Public License “or any later version”
applies to it, you have the option of following the terms and
@@ -214,14 +261,21 @@ published by the Free Software Foundation. If the Library
as you
received it does not specify a version number of the GNU Lesser
General Public License, you may choose any version of the GNU Lesser
General Public License ever published by the Free Software Foundation.
-</p>
-<p>If the Library as you received it specifies that a proxy can decide
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ If the Library as you received it specifies that a proxy can decide
whether future versions of the GNU Lesser General Public License shall
apply, that proxy’s public statement of acceptance of any version is
permanent authorization for you to choose that version for the
Library.
-</p>
-</li></ol><a
name="index-Lesser-General-Public-License-_0028LGPL_0029_002c-GNU-_0028see-also-LGPL_0029-1"></a>
-<a name="index-LGPL-1"></a>
-<a
name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Lesser-General-Public-License-_0028LGPL_0029-_0028see-also-LGPL_0029-1"></a>
-<hr size="2"></section></body></html>
+ </p>
+ </li>
+ </ol>
+ <a
name="index-Lesser-General-Public-License-_0028LGPL_0029_002c-GNU-_0028see-also-LGPL_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-LGPL-1">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Lesser-General-Public-License-_0028LGPL_0029-_0028see-also-LGPL_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ <hr size="2"/>
+</section>
diff --git a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_31.html
b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_31.html
index b34bad3..76715fc 100644
--- a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_31.html
+++ b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_31.html
@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
-<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/loose.dtd";>
-<html><!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
+<!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
Free Software Foundation
@@ -19,74 +18,81 @@ ISBN 978-0-9831592-0-9
Cover design by Rob Myers.
Cover photograph by Peter Hinely.
- --><!-- Created on February 18, 2016 by texi2html 1.82
-texi2html was written by:
- Lionel Cons <address@hidden> (original author)
- Karl Berry <address@hidden>
- Olaf Bachmann <address@hidden>
- and many others.
-Maintained by: Many creative people.
-Send bugs and suggestions to <address@hidden>
---><head><title>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 31. GNU Free
Documentation License</title><meta name="description" content="This is the
second edition of Richard Stallman's collection of essays."><meta
name="keywords" content="Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 31. GNU Free
Documentation License"><meta name="resource-type" content="document"><meta
name="distribution" content="global"><meta name="Generator" content="texi2html
1.82"><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/ht [...]
-<!--
-a.summary-letter {text-decoration: none}
-blockquote.smallquotation {font-size: smaller}
-pre.display {font-family: serif}
-pre.format {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-comment {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-preformatted {font-family: serif}
-pre.smalldisplay {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallexample {font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallformat {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smalllisp {font-size: smaller}
-span.roman {font-family:serif; font-weight:normal;}
-span.sansserif {font-family:sans-serif; font-weight:normal;}
-ul.toc {list-style: none}
--->
-</style><link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
href="../static/web-common/style.css"></head><body lang="en" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
text="#000000" link="#0000FF" vlink="#800080" alink="#FF0000" class="article">
-
-<a name="FDL"></a>
-<header><div id="logo"><a href="/"><img src="../static/gnu.svg" height="100"
width="100"></a></div><h1 class="book-title">Free Software, Free Society, 2nd
ed.</h1></header><section id="main"><a
name="GNU-Free-Documentation-License"></a>
-<h1 class="chapter"> 31. GNU Free Documentation License </h1>
-
-<a
name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Free-Documentation-License-_0028FDL_0029-_0028see-also-FDL_002c-manuals_002c-and-documentation_0029"></a>
-<a
name="index-Free-Documentation-License-_0028FDL_0029_002c-GNU-_0028see-also-FDL_002c-manuals_002c-and-documentation_0029"></a>
-<a
name="index-manuals-_0028see-also-manuals_002c-FDL_002c-and-documentation_0029-3"></a>
-<a name="index-FDL-_0028see-also-both-manuals-and-documentation_0029-2"></a>
-<p align="center"> Version 1.3, 3 November 2008
-</p>
-<table><tr><td> </td><td><pre class="display">Copyright © 2000, 2001, 2002,
2007, 2008 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
+ -->
+
+<section id="main">
+ <a name="GNU-Free-Documentation-License">
+ </a>
+ <h1 class="chapter">
+ 31. GNU Free Documentation License
+ </h1>
+ <a
name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Free-Documentation-License-_0028FDL_0029-_0028see-also-FDL_002c-manuals_002c-and-documentation_0029">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-Free-Documentation-License-_0028FDL_0029_002c-GNU-_0028see-also-FDL_002c-manuals_002c-and-documentation_0029">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-manuals-_0028see-also-manuals_002c-FDL_002c-and-documentation_0029-3">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-FDL-_0028see-also-both-manuals-and-documentation_0029-2">
+ </a>
+ <p align="center">
+ Version 1.3, 3 November 2008
+ </p>
+ <table>
+ <tr>
+ <td>
+ </td>
+ <td>
+ <pre class="display">Copyright © 2000, 2001, 2002, 2007, 2008 Free
Software Foundation, Inc.
<a href="http://fsf.org/";>http://fsf.org/</a>
Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies
of this license document, but changing it is not allowed.
-</pre></td></tr></table><ol><li> <strong>PREAMBLE</strong>
-
-<p>The purpose of this License is to make a manual, textbook, or other
-functional and useful document <em>free</em> in the sense of freedom: to
+</pre>
+ </td>
+ </tr>
+ </table>
+ <ol>
+ <li>
+ <strong>
+ PREAMBLE
+ </strong>
+ <p>
+ The purpose of this License is to make a manual, textbook, or other
+functional and useful document
+ <em>
+ free
+ </em>
+ in the sense of freedom: to
assure everyone the effective freedom to copy and redistribute it,
with or without modifying it, either commercially or noncommercially.
Secondarily, this License preserves for the author and publisher a way
to get credit for their work, while not being considered responsible
for modifications made by others.
-</p>
-<a name="index-copyleft_002c-FDL-and"></a>
-<p>This License is a kind of “copyleft”, which means that derivative
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-copyleft_002c-FDL-and">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ This License is a kind of “copyleft”, which means that derivative
works of the document must themselves be free in the same sense. It
complements the GNU General Public License, which is a copyleft
license designed for free software.
-</p>
-<p>We have designed this License in order to use it for manuals for free
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ We have designed this License in order to use it for manuals for free
software, because free software needs free documentation: a free
program should come with manuals providing the same freedoms that the
software does. But this License is not limited to software manuals;
it can be used for any textual work, regardless of subject matter or
whether it is published as a printed book. We recommend this License
principally for works whose purpose is instruction or reference.
-</p>
-</li><li> <strong>APPLICABILITY AND DEFINITIONS</strong>
-
-<p>This License applies to any manual or other work, in any medium, that
+ </p>
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ <strong>
+ APPLICABILITY AND DEFINITIONS
+ </strong>
+ <p>
+ This License applies to any manual or other work, in any medium, that
contains a notice placed by the copyright holder saying it can be
distributed under the terms of this License. Such a notice grants a
world-wide, royalty-free license, unlimited in duration, to use that
@@ -95,12 +101,14 @@ refers to any such manual or work. Any member of the
public is a
licensee, and is addressed as “you”. You accept the license if you
copy, modify or distribute the work in a way requiring permission
under copyright law.
-</p>
-<p>A “Modified Version” of the Document means any work containing the
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ A “Modified Version” of the Document means any work containing the
Document or a portion of it, either copied verbatim, or with
modifications and/or translated into another language.
-</p>
-<p>A “Secondary Section” is a named appendix or a front-matter section
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ A “Secondary Section” is a named appendix or a front-matter section
of the Document that deals exclusively with the relationship of the
publishers or authors of the Document to the Document’s overall
subject (or to related matters) and contains nothing that could fall
@@ -110,21 +118,24 @@ any mathematics.) The relationship could be a matter of
historical
connection with the subject or with related matters, or of legal,
commercial, philosophical, ethical or political position regarding
them.
-</p>
-<p>The “Invariant Sections” are certain Secondary Sections whose titles
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The “Invariant Sections” are certain Secondary Sections whose titles
are designated, as being those of Invariant Sections, in the notice
that says that the Document is released under this License. If a
section does not fit the above definition of Secondary then it is not
allowed to be designated as Invariant. The Document may contain zero
Invariant Sections. If the Document does not identify any Invariant
Sections then there are none.
-</p>
-<p>The “Cover Texts” are certain short passages of text that are listed,
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The “Cover Texts” are certain short passages of text that are listed,
as Front-Cover Texts or Back-Cover Texts, in the notice that says that
the Document is released under this License. A Front-Cover Text may
be at most 5 words, and a Back-Cover Text may be at most 25 words.
-</p>
-<p>A “Transparent” copy of the Document means a machine-readable copy,
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ A “Transparent” copy of the Document means a machine-readable copy,
represented in a format whose specification is available to the
general public, that is suitable for revising the document
straightforwardly with generic text editors or (for images composed of
@@ -136,20 +147,35 @@ format whose markup, or absence of markup, has been
arranged to thwart
or discourage subsequent modification by readers is not Transparent.
An image format is not Transparent if used for any substantial amount
of text. A copy that is not “Transparent” is called “Opaque”.
-</p>
-<a name="index-HTML"></a>
-<a name="index-ASCII"></a>
-<a name="index-DTD"></a>
-<a name="index-LaTeX"></a>
-<a name="index-SGML"></a>
-<a name="index-XML"></a>
-<a name="index-PDF"></a>
-<a name="index-PDF-1"></a>
-<a name="index-PNG-1"></a>
-<a name="index-XCF"></a>
-<a name="index-JPEG-2"></a>
-<p>Examples of suitable formats for Transparent copies include plain
-<small>ASCII</small> without markup, Texinfo input format, LaTeX input
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-HTML">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-ASCII">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-DTD">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-LaTeX">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-SGML">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-XML">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-PDF">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-PDF-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-PNG-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-XCF">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-JPEG-2">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Examples of suitable formats for Transparent copies include plain
+ <small>
+ ASCII
+ </small>
+ without markup, Texinfo input format, LaTeX input
format, SGML or XML using a publicly available
DTD, and standard-conforming simple HTML,
PostScript or PDF designed for human modification. Examples
@@ -160,35 +186,43 @@ XML for which the DTD and/or processing tools are
not generally available, and the machine-generated HTML,
PostScript or PDF produced by some word processors for
output purposes only.
-</p>
-<p>The “Title Page” means, for a printed book, the title page itself,
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The “Title Page” means, for a printed book, the title page itself,
plus such following pages as are needed to hold, legibly, the material
this License requires to appear in the title page. For works in
formats which do not have any title page as such, “Title Page” means
the text near the most prominent appearance of the work’s title,
preceding the beginning of the body of the text.
-</p>
-<p>The “publisher” means any person or entity that distributes copies
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The “publisher” means any person or entity that distributes copies
of the Document to the public.
-</p>
-<p>A section “Entitled XYZ” means a named subunit of the Document whose
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ A section “Entitled XYZ” means a named subunit of the Document whose
title either is precisely XYZ or contains XYZ in parentheses following
text that translates XYZ in another language. (Here XYZ stands for a
specific section name mentioned below, such as “Acknowledgements”,
“Dedications”, “Endorsements”, or “History”.) To “Preserve the Title”
of such a section when you modify the Document means that it remains a
section “Entitled XYZ” according to this definition.
-</p>
-<p>The Document may include Warranty Disclaimers next to the notice which
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The Document may include Warranty Disclaimers next to the notice which
states that this License applies to the Document. These Warranty
Disclaimers are considered to be included by reference in this
License, but only as regards disclaiming warranties: any other
implication that these Warranty Disclaimers may have is void and has
no effect on the meaning of this License.
-</p>
-</li><li> <strong>VERBATIM COPYING</strong>
-
-<p>You may copy and distribute the Document in any medium, either
+ </p>
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ <strong>
+ VERBATIM COPYING
+ </strong>
+ <p>
+ You may copy and distribute the Document in any medium, either
commercially or noncommercially, provided that this License, the
copyright notices, and the license notice saying this License applies
to the Document are reproduced in all copies, and that you add no other
@@ -197,13 +231,18 @@ technical measures to obstruct or control the reading or
further
copying of the copies you make or distribute. However, you may accept
compensation in exchange for copies. If you distribute a large enough
number of copies you must also follow the conditions in section 3.
-</p>
-<p>You may also lend copies, under the same conditions stated above, and
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ You may also lend copies, under the same conditions stated above, and
you may publicly display copies.
-</p>
-</li><li> <strong>COPYING IN QUANTITY</strong>
-
-<p>If you publish printed copies (or copies in media that commonly have
+ </p>
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ <strong>
+ COPYING IN QUANTITY
+ </strong>
+ <p>
+ If you publish printed copies (or copies in media that commonly have
printed covers) of the Document, numbering more than 100, and the
Document’s license notice requires Cover Texts, you must enclose the
copies in covers that carry, clearly and legibly, all these Cover
@@ -215,13 +254,15 @@ visible. You may add other material on the covers in
addition.
Copying with changes limited to the covers, as long as they preserve
the title of the Document and satisfy these conditions, can be treated
as verbatim copying in other respects.
-</p>
-<p>If the required texts for either cover are too voluminous to fit
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ If the required texts for either cover are too voluminous to fit
legibly, you should put the first ones listed (as many as fit
reasonably) on the actual cover, and continue the rest onto adjacent
pages.
-</p>
-<p>If you publish or distribute Opaque copies of the Document numbering
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ If you publish or distribute Opaque copies of the Document numbering
more than 100, you must either include a machine-readable Transparent
copy along with each Opaque copy, or state in or with each Opaque copy
a computer-network location from which the general network-using
@@ -233,110 +274,121 @@ that this Transparent copy will remain thus accessible
at the stated
location until at least one year after the last time you distribute an
Opaque copy (directly or through your agents or retailers) of that
edition to the public.
-</p>
-<p>It is requested, but not required, that you contact the authors of the
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ It is requested, but not required, that you contact the authors of the
Document well before redistributing any large number of copies, to give
them a chance to provide you with an updated version of the Document.
-</p>
-</li><li> <strong>MODIFICATIONS</strong>
-
-<p>You may copy and distribute a Modified Version of the Document under
+ </p>
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ <strong>
+ MODIFICATIONS
+ </strong>
+ <p>
+ You may copy and distribute a Modified Version of the Document under
the conditions of sections 2 and 3 above, provided that you release
the Modified Version under precisely this License, with the Modified
Version filling the role of the Document, thus licensing distribution
and modification of the Modified Version to whoever possesses a copy
of it. In addition, you must do these things in the Modified Version:
-</p>
-<ol><li>
-Use in the Title Page (and on the covers, if any) a title distinct
+ </p>
+ <ol>
+ <li>
+ Use in the Title Page (and on the covers, if any) a title distinct
from that of the Document, and from those of previous versions
(which should, if there were any, be listed in the History section
of the Document). You may use the same title as a previous version
if the original publisher of that version gives permission.
-
-</li><li>
-List on the Title Page, as authors, one or more persons or entities
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ List on the Title Page, as authors, one or more persons or entities
responsible for authorship of the modifications in the Modified
Version, together with at least five of the principal authors of the
Document (all of its principal authors, if it has fewer than five),
unless they release you from this requirement.
-
-</li><li>
-State on the Title page the name of the publisher of the
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ State on the Title page the name of the publisher of the
Modified Version, as the publisher.
-
-</li><li>
-Preserve all the copyright notices of the Document.
-
-</li><li>
-Add an appropriate copyright notice for your modifications
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ Preserve all the copyright notices of the Document.
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ Add an appropriate copyright notice for your modifications
adjacent to the other copyright notices.
-
-</li><li>
-Include, immediately after the copyright notices, a license notice
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ Include, immediately after the copyright notices, a license notice
giving the public permission to use the Modified Version under the
terms of this License, in the form shown in the Addendum below.
-
-</li><li>
-Preserve in that license notice the full lists of Invariant Sections
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ Preserve in that license notice the full lists of Invariant Sections
and required Cover Texts given in the Document’s license notice.
-
-</li><li>
-Include an unaltered copy of this License.
-
-</li><li>
-Preserve the section Entitled “History”, Preserve its Title, and add
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ Include an unaltered copy of this License.
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ Preserve the section Entitled “History”, Preserve its Title, and add
to it an item stating at least the title, year, new authors, and
publisher of the Modified Version as given on the Title Page. If
there is no section Entitled “History” in the Document, create one
stating the title, year, authors, and publisher of the Document as
given on its Title Page, then add an item describing the Modified
Version as stated in the previous sentence.
-
-</li><li>
-Preserve the network location, if any, given in the Document for
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ Preserve the network location, if any, given in the Document for
public access to a Transparent copy of the Document, and likewise
the network locations given in the Document for previous versions
it was based on. These may be placed in the “History” section.
You may omit a network location for a work that was published at
least four years before the Document itself, or if the original
publisher of the version it refers to gives permission.
-
-</li><li>
-For any section Entitled “Acknowledgements” or “Dedications”, Preserve
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ For any section Entitled “Acknowledgements” or “Dedications”, Preserve
the Title of the section, and preserve in the section all the
substance and tone of each of the contributor acknowledgements and/or
dedications given therein.
-
-</li><li>
-Preserve all the Invariant Sections of the Document,
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ Preserve all the Invariant Sections of the Document,
unaltered in their text and in their titles. Section numbers
or the equivalent are not considered part of the section titles.
-
-</li><li>
-Delete any section Entitled “Endorsements”. Such a section
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ Delete any section Entitled “Endorsements”. Such a section
may not be included in the Modified Version.
-
-</li><li>
-Do not retitle any existing section to be Entitled “Endorsements” or
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ Do not retitle any existing section to be Entitled “Endorsements” or
to conflict in title with any Invariant Section.
-
-</li><li>
-Preserve any Warranty Disclaimers.
-</li></ol><p>If the Modified Version includes new front-matter sections or
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ Preserve any Warranty Disclaimers.
+ </li>
+ </ol>
+ <p>
+ If the Modified Version includes new front-matter sections or
appendices that qualify as Secondary Sections and contain no material
copied from the Document, you may at your option designate some or all
of these sections as invariant. To do this, add their titles to the
list of Invariant Sections in the Modified Version’s license notice.
These titles must be distinct from any other section titles.
-</p>
-<p>You may add a section Entitled “Endorsements”, provided it contains
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ You may add a section Entitled “Endorsements”, provided it contains
nothing but endorsements of your Modified Version by various
parties—for example, statements of peer review or that the text has
been approved by an organization as the authoritative definition of a
standard.
-</p>
-<p>You may add a passage of up to five words as a Front-Cover Text, and a
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ You may add a passage of up to five words as a Front-Cover Text, and a
passage of up to 25 words as a Back-Cover Text, to the end of the list
of Cover Texts in the Modified Version. Only one passage of
Front-Cover Text and one of Back-Cover Text may be added by (or
@@ -345,21 +397,27 @@ includes a cover text for the same cover, previously
added by you or
by arrangement made by the same entity you are acting on behalf of,
you may not add another; but you may replace the old one, on explicit
permission from the previous publisher that added the old one.
-</p>
-<p>The author(s) and publisher(s) of the Document do not by this License
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The author(s) and publisher(s) of the Document do not by this License
give permission to use their names for publicity for or to assert or
imply endorsement of any Modified Version.
-</p>
-</li><li> <strong>COMBINING DOCUMENTS</strong>
-
-<p>You may combine the Document with other documents released under this
+ </p>
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ <strong>
+ COMBINING DOCUMENTS
+ </strong>
+ <p>
+ You may combine the Document with other documents released under this
License, under the terms defined in section 4 above for modified
versions, provided that you include in the combination all of the
Invariant Sections of all of the original documents, unmodified, and
list them all as Invariant Sections of your combined work in its
license notice, and that you preserve all their Warranty Disclaimers.
-</p>
-<p>The combined work need only contain one copy of this License, and
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The combined work need only contain one copy of this License, and
multiple identical Invariant Sections may be replaced with a single
copy. If there are multiple Invariant Sections with the same name but
different contents, make the title of each such section unique by
@@ -367,29 +425,39 @@ adding at the end of it, in parentheses, the name of the
original
author or publisher of that section if known, or else a unique number.
Make the same adjustment to the section titles in the list of
Invariant Sections in the license notice of the combined work.
-</p>
-<p>In the combination, you must combine any sections Entitled “History”
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ In the combination, you must combine any sections Entitled “History”
in the various original documents, forming one section Entitled
“History”; likewise combine any sections Entitled “Acknowledgements”,
and any sections Entitled “Dedications”. You must delete all
sections Entitled “Endorsements.”
-</p>
-</li><li> <strong>COLLECTIONS OF DOCUMENTS</strong>
-
-<p>You may make a collection consisting of the Document and other documents
+ </p>
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ <strong>
+ COLLECTIONS OF DOCUMENTS
+ </strong>
+ <p>
+ You may make a collection consisting of the Document and other documents
released under this License, and replace the individual copies of this
License in the various documents with a single copy that is included in
the collection, provided that you follow the rules of this License for
verbatim copying of each of the documents in all other respects.
-</p>
-<p>You may extract a single document from such a collection, and distribute
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ You may extract a single document from such a collection, and distribute
it individually under this License, provided you insert a copy of this
License into the extracted document, and follow this License in all
other respects regarding verbatim copying of that document.
-</p>
-</li><li> <strong>AGGREGATION WITH INDEPENDENT WORKS</strong>
-
-<p>A compilation of the Document or its derivatives with other separate
+ </p>
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ <strong>
+ AGGREGATION WITH INDEPENDENT WORKS
+ </strong>
+ <p>
+ A compilation of the Document or its derivatives with other separate
and independent documents or works, in or on a volume of a storage or
distribution medium, is called an “aggregate” if the copyright
resulting from the compilation is not used to limit the legal rights
@@ -397,18 +465,23 @@ of the compilation’s users beyond what the individual
works permit.
When the Document is included in an aggregate, this License does not
apply to the other works in the aggregate which are not themselves
derivative works of the Document.
-</p>
-<p>If the Cover Text requirement of section 3 is applicable to these
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ If the Cover Text requirement of section 3 is applicable to these
copies of the Document, then if the Document is less than one half of
the entire aggregate, the Document’s Cover Texts may be placed on
covers that bracket the Document within the aggregate, or the
electronic equivalent of covers if the Document is in electronic form.
Otherwise they must appear on printed covers that bracket the whole
aggregate.
-</p>
-</li><li> <strong>TRANSLATION</strong>
-
-<p>Translation is considered a kind of modification, so you may
+ </p>
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ <strong>
+ TRANSLATION
+ </strong>
+ <p>
+ Translation is considered a kind of modification, so you may
distribute translations of the Document under the terms of section 4.
Replacing Invariant Sections with translations requires special
permission from their copyright holders, but you may include
@@ -420,48 +493,64 @@ the original English version of this License and the
original versions
of those notices and disclaimers. In case of a disagreement between
the translation and the original version of this License or a notice
or disclaimer, the original version will prevail.
-</p>
-<p>If a section in the Document is Entitled “Acknowledgements”,
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ If a section in the Document is Entitled “Acknowledgements”,
“Dedications”, or “History”, the requirement (section 4) to Preserve
its Title (section 1) will typically require changing the actual
title.
-</p>
-</li><li> <strong>TERMINATION</strong>
-
-<p>You may not copy, modify, sublicense, or distribute the Document
+ </p>
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ <strong>
+ TERMINATION
+ </strong>
+ <p>
+ You may not copy, modify, sublicense, or distribute the Document
except as expressly provided under this License. Any attempt
otherwise to copy, modify, sublicense, or distribute it is void, and
will automatically terminate your rights under this License.
-</p>
-<p>However, if you cease all violation of this License, then your license
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ However, if you cease all violation of this License, then your license
from a particular copyright holder is reinstated (a) provisionally,
unless and until the copyright holder explicitly and finally
terminates your license, and (b) permanently, if the copyright holder
fails to notify you of the violation by some reasonable means prior to
60 days after the cessation.
-</p>
-<p>Moreover, your license from a particular copyright holder is
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Moreover, your license from a particular copyright holder is
reinstated permanently if the copyright holder notifies you of the
violation by some reasonable means, this is the first time you have
received notice of violation of this License (for any work) from that
copyright holder, and you cure the violation prior to 30 days after
your receipt of the notice.
-</p>
-<p>Termination of your rights under this section does not terminate the
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Termination of your rights under this section does not terminate the
licenses of parties who have received copies or rights from you under
this License. If your rights have been terminated and not permanently
reinstated, receipt of a copy of some or all of the same material does
not give you any rights to use it.
-</p>
-</li><li> <strong>FUTURE REVISIONS OF THIS LICENSE</strong>
-
-<p>The Free Software Foundation may publish new, revised versions
+ </p>
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ <strong>
+ FUTURE REVISIONS OF THIS LICENSE
+ </strong>
+ <p>
+ The Free Software Foundation may publish new, revised versions
of the GNU Free Documentation License from time to time. Such new
versions will be similar in spirit to the present version, but may
differ in detail to address new problems or concerns. See
-<a href="http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/";>http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/</a>.
-</p>
-<p>Each version of the License is given a distinguishing version number.
+ <a href="http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/";>
+ http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/
+ </a>
+ .
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Each version of the License is given a distinguishing version number.
If the Document specifies that a particular numbered version of this
License “or any later version” applies to it, you have the option of
following the terms and conditions either of that specified version or
@@ -473,69 +562,109 @@ specifies that a proxy can decide which future versions
of this
License can be used, that proxy’s public statement of acceptance of a
version permanently authorizes you to choose that version for the
Document.
-</p>
-</li><li> <strong>RELICENSING</strong>
-
-<p>“Massive Multiauthor Collaboration Site” (or “MMC Site”) means any
+ </p>
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ <strong>
+ RELICENSING
+ </strong>
+ <p>
+ “Massive Multiauthor Collaboration Site” (or “MMC Site”) means any
World Wide Web server that publishes copyrightable works and also
provides prominent facilities for anybody to edit those works. A
public wiki that anybody can edit is an example of such a server. A
“Massive Multiauthor Collaboration” (or “MMC”) contained in the
site means any set of copyrightable works thus published on the MMC
site.
-</p>
-<p>“CC-BY-SA” means the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ “CC-BY-SA” means the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0
license published by Creative Commons Corporation, a not-for-profit
corporation with a principal place of business in San Francisco,
California, as well as future copyleft versions of that license
published by that same organization.
-</p>
-<p>“Incorporate” means to publish or republish a Document, in whole or
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ “Incorporate” means to publish or republish a Document, in whole or
in part, as part of another Document.
-</p>
-<p>An MMC is “eligible for relicensing” if it is licensed under this
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ An MMC is “eligible for relicensing” if it is licensed under this
License, and if all works that were first published under this License
somewhere other than this MMC, and subsequently incorporated in whole
or in part into the MMC, (1) had no cover texts or invariant sections,
and (2) were thus incorporated prior to November 1, 2008.
-</p>
-<p>The operator of an MMC Site may republish an MMC contained in the site
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The operator of an MMC Site may republish an MMC contained in the site
under CC-BY-SA on the same site at any time before August 1, 2009,
provided the MMC is eligible for relicensing.
-</p>
-</li></ol><a
name="ADDENDUM_003a-How-to-use-this-License-for-your-documents"></a>
-<h2 class="heading"> ADDENDUM: How to use this License for your documents </h2>
-
-<p><a name="FDL-Instructions"></a>
-To use this License in a document you have written, include a copy of
+ </p>
+ </li>
+ </ol>
+ <a name="ADDENDUM_003a-How-to-use-this-License-for-your-documents">
+ </a>
+ <h2 class="heading">
+ ADDENDUM: How to use this License for your documents
+ </h2>
+ <p>
+ <a name="FDL-Instructions">
+ </a>
+ To use this License in a document you have written, include a copy of
the License in the document and put the following copyright and
license notices just after the title page:
-</p>
-<table><tr><td> </td><td><pre class="smallexample">Copyright (C)
<var>year</var> <var>your name</var>.
+ </p>
+ <table>
+ <tr>
+ <td>
+ </td>
+ <td>
+ <pre class="smallexample">Copyright (C) <var>year</var> <var>your
name</var>.
Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document
under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.3 or
any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with
no Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts.
A copy of the license is included in the section entitled
``GNU Free Documentation License''.
-</pre></td></tr></table><p>If you have Invariant Sections, Front-Cover Texts
and Back-Cover Texts,
+</pre>
+ </td>
+ </tr>
+ </table>
+ <p>
+ If you have Invariant Sections, Front-Cover Texts and Back-Cover Texts,
replace the “with…Texts.” line with this:
-</p>
-<table><tr><td> </td><td><pre class="smallexample"> with the Invariant
Sections being <var>list their titles</var>, with
+ </p>
+ <table>
+ <tr>
+ <td>
+ </td>
+ <td>
+ <pre class="smallexample"> with the Invariant Sections being <var>list
their titles</var>, with
the Front-Cover Texts being <var>list</var>, and with the Back-Cover Texts
being <var>list</var>.
-</pre></td></tr></table><p>If you have Invariant Sections without Cover Texts,
or some other
+</pre>
+ </td>
+ </tr>
+ </table>
+ <p>
+ If you have Invariant Sections without Cover Texts, or some other
combination of the three, merge those two alternatives to suit the
situation.
-</p>
-<p>If your document contains nontrivial examples of program code, we
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ If your document contains nontrivial examples of program code, we
recommend releasing these examples in parallel under your choice of
free software license, such as the GNU General Public License,
to permit their use in free software.
-<a
name="index-Free-Documentation-License-_0028FDL_0029_002c-GNU-_0028see-also-FDL_002c-manuals_002c-and-documentation_0029-1"></a>
-<a
name="index-manuals-_0028see-also-manuals_002c-FDL_002c-and-documentation_0029-4"></a>
-<a
name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Free-Documentation-License-_0028FDL_0029-_0028see-also-FDL_002c-manuals_002c-and-documentation_0029-1"></a>
-<a
name="index-licenses-_0028see-also-Affero_002c-FDL_002c-GPL_002c-LGPL_002c-X11_002c-BSD_002c-XFree86_002c-and-lax-permissive-licenses_0029-1"></a>
-<a name="index-FDL-_0028see-also-both-manuals-and-documentation_0029-3"></a>
-</p>
-</section></body></html>
+ <a
name="index-Free-Documentation-License-_0028FDL_0029_002c-GNU-_0028see-also-FDL_002c-manuals_002c-and-documentation_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-manuals-_0028see-also-manuals_002c-FDL_002c-and-documentation_0029-4">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Free-Documentation-License-_0028FDL_0029-_0028see-also-FDL_002c-manuals_002c-and-documentation_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-licenses-_0028see-also-Affero_002c-FDL_002c-GPL_002c-LGPL_002c-X11_002c-BSD_002c-XFree86_002c-and-lax-permissive-licenses_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-FDL-_0028see-also-both-manuals-and-documentation_0029-3">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+</section>
diff --git a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_32.html
b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_32.html
index b44aa0b..05a1dbe 100644
--- a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_32.html
+++ b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_32.html
@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
-<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/loose.dtd";>
-<html><!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
+<!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
Free Software Foundation
@@ -19,44 +18,30 @@ ISBN 978-0-9831592-0-9
Cover design by Rob Myers.
Cover photograph by Peter Hinely.
- --><!-- Created on February 18, 2016 by texi2html 1.82
-texi2html was written by:
- Lionel Cons <address@hidden> (original author)
- Karl Berry <address@hidden>
- Olaf Bachmann <address@hidden>
- and many others.
-Maintained by: Many creative people.
-Send bugs and suggestions to <address@hidden>
---><head><title>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 32. Can You Trust Your
Computer?</title><meta name="description" content="This is the second edition
of Richard Stallman's collection of essays."><meta name="keywords"
content="Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 32. Can You Trust Your
Computer?"><meta name="resource-type" content="document"><meta
name="distribution" content="global"><meta name="Generator" content="texi2html
1.82"><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; [...]
-<!--
-a.summary-letter {text-decoration: none}
-blockquote.smallquotation {font-size: smaller}
-pre.display {font-family: serif}
-pre.format {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-comment {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-preformatted {font-family: serif}
-pre.smalldisplay {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallexample {font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallformat {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smalllisp {font-size: smaller}
-span.roman {font-family:serif; font-weight:normal;}
-span.sansserif {font-family:sans-serif; font-weight:normal;}
-ul.toc {list-style: none}
--->
-</style><link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
href="../static/web-common/style.css"></head><body lang="en" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
text="#000000" link="#0000FF" vlink="#800080" alink="#FF0000" class="article">
+ -->
-<a name="Can-You-Trust"></a>
-<header><div id="logo"><a href="/"><img src="../static/gnu.svg" height="100"
width="100"></a></div><h1 class="book-title">Free Software, Free Society, 2nd
ed.</h1></header><section id="main"><a
name="Can-You-Trust-Your-Computer_003f"></a>
-<h1 class="chapter"> 32. Can You Trust Your Computer? </h1>
-
-<a name="index-proprietary-software-_0028see-also-software_0029-1"></a>
-<a
name="index-Microsoft_002c-Palladium-_0028see-also-both-Palladium-and-_0060_0060trusted-computing_0027_0027_0029"></a>
-<a
name="index-Intel-_0028see-also-_0060_0060trusted-computing_0027_0027_0029-1"></a>
-<a
name="index-_0060_0060trusted-computing_002c_0027_0027-avoid-use-of-term-_0028see-also-treacherous-computing_0029-2"></a>
-<a name="index-treacherous-computing-2"></a>
-<a
name="index-traps_002c-treacherous-computing-_0028see-also-treacherous-computing_0029"></a>
-<a name="index-Palladium-1"></a>
-<p>Who should your computer take its orders from? Most people think
+<section id="main">
+ <a name="Can-You-Trust-Your-Computer_003f">
+ </a>
+ <h1 class="chapter">
+ 32. Can You Trust Your Computer?
+ </h1>
+ <a name="index-proprietary-software-_0028see-also-software_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-Microsoft_002c-Palladium-_0028see-also-both-Palladium-and-_0060_0060trusted-computing_0027_0027_0029">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-Intel-_0028see-also-_0060_0060trusted-computing_0027_0027_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-_0060_0060trusted-computing_002c_0027_0027-avoid-use-of-term-_0028see-also-treacherous-computing_0029-2">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-treacherous-computing-2">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-traps_002c-treacherous-computing-_0028see-also-treacherous-computing_0029">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Palladium-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Who should your computer take its orders from? Most people think
their computers should obey them, not obey someone else. With a plan
they call “trusted computing,” large media corporations
(including the movie companies and record companies), together with
@@ -65,32 +50,37 @@ your computer obey them instead of you. (Microsoft’s
version of this
scheme is called Palladium.) Proprietary programs have
included malicious features before, but this plan would make it
universal.
-</p>
-<p>Proprietary software means, fundamentally, that you don’t control what
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Proprietary software means, fundamentally, that you don’t control what
it does; you can’t study the source code, or change it. It’s not
surprising that clever businessmen find ways to use their control to
put you at a disadvantage. Microsoft has done this several times: one
version of Windows was designed to report to Microsoft all the
software on your hard disk; a recent “security” upgrade in
-<a
name="index-Windows-Media-Player-_0028see-also-both-DRM-and-treacherous-computing_0029"></a>
-Windows Media Player required users to agree to new restrictions. But
-Microsoft is not alone: the
-<a
name="index-KaZaA-_0028see-also-both-DRM-and-treacherous-computing_0029"></a>
-KaZaA music-sharing software is designed
+ <a
name="index-Windows-Media-Player-_0028see-also-both-DRM-and-treacherous-computing_0029">
+ </a>
+ Windows Media Player required users to agree to new restrictions. But
+Microsoft is not alone: the
+ <a name="index-KaZaA-_0028see-also-both-DRM-and-treacherous-computing_0029">
+ </a>
+ KaZaA music-sharing software is designed
so that KaZaA’s business partner can rent out the use of your computer
to its clients. These malicious features are often secret, but even
once you know about them it is hard to remove them, since you don’t
have the source code.
-</p>
-<p>In the past, these were isolated incidents. “Trusted
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ In the past, these were isolated incidents. “Trusted
computing” would make the practice pervasive. “Treacherous
computing” is a more appropriate name, because the plan is
designed to make sure your computer will systematically disobey you.
In fact, it is designed to stop your computer from functioning as a
general-purpose computer. Every operation may require explicit
permission.
-</p>
-<p>The technical idea underlying treacherous computing is that the
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The technical idea underlying treacherous computing is that the
computer includes a digital encryption and signature device, and the
keys are kept secret from you. Proprietary programs will use this
device to control which other programs you can run, which documents or
@@ -99,10 +89,13 @@ programs will continually download new authorization rules
through the
Internet, and impose those rules automatically on your work. If you
don’t allow your computer to obtain the new rules periodically from
the Internet, some capabilities will automatically cease to function.
-</p>
-<a name="index-DRM_002c-treacherous-computing-and"></a>
-<a name="index-Hollywood-1"></a>
-<p>Of course, Hollywood and the record companies plan to use treacherous
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-DRM_002c-treacherous-computing-and">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Hollywood-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Of course, Hollywood and the record companies plan to use treacherous
computing for Digital Restrictions Management (DRM), so
that downloaded videos and music can be played only on one specified
computer. Sharing will be entirely impossible, at least using the
@@ -111,41 +104,48 @@ public, ought to have both the freedom and the ability to
share these
things. (I expect that someone will find a way to produce unencrypted
versions, and to upload and share them, so DRM will not entirely
succeed, but that is no excuse for the system.)
-</p>
-<p>Making sharing impossible is bad enough, but it gets worse. There are
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Making sharing impossible is bad enough, but it gets worse. There are
plans to use the same facility for email and documents—resulting
in email that disappears in two weeks, or documents that can only be
read on the computers in one company.
-</p>
-<p>Imagine if you get an email from your boss telling you to do something
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Imagine if you get an email from your boss telling you to do something
that you think is risky; a month later, when it backfires, you can’t
use the email to show that the decision was not yours. “Getting
it in writing” doesn’t protect you when the order is written in
disappearing ink.
-</p>
-<p>Imagine if you get an email from your boss stating a policy that is
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Imagine if you get an email from your boss stating a policy that is
illegal or morally outrageous, such as to shred your company’s audit
documents, or to allow a dangerous threat to your country to move
forward unchecked. Today you can send this to a reporter and expose
the activity. With treacherous computing, the reporter won’t be able
to read the document; her computer will refuse to obey her.
Treacherous computing becomes a paradise for corruption.
-</p>
-<p>Word processors such as
-<a
name="index-Word_002c-and-treacherous-computing-_0028see-also-treacherous-computing_0029-2"></a>
-Microsoft Word could use treacherous computing
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Word processors such as
+ <a
name="index-Word_002c-and-treacherous-computing-_0028see-also-treacherous-computing_0029-2">
+ </a>
+ Microsoft Word could use treacherous computing
when they save your documents, to make sure no competing word
processors can read them. Today we must figure out the secrets of
Word format by laborious experiments in order to make free word
processors read Word documents. If Word encrypts documents using
treacherous computing when saving them, the free software community
won’t have a chance of developing software to read them—and if
-we could, such programs might even be forbidden by the
-<a
name="index-DMCA-_0028see-also-_0060_0060Right-to-Read_002c_0027_0027-fair-use_002c-DRM_002c-and-libraries_0029-3"></a>
-Digital
+we could, such programs might even be forbidden by the
+ <a
name="index-DMCA-_0028see-also-_0060_0060Right-to-Read_002c_0027_0027-fair-use_002c-DRM_002c-and-libraries_0029-3">
+ </a>
+ Digital
Millennium Copyright Act.
-</p>
-<p>Programs that use treacherous computing will continually download new
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Programs that use treacherous computing will continually download new
authorization rules through the Internet, and impose those rules
automatically on your work. If Microsoft, or the US government, does
not like what you said in a document you wrote, they could post new
@@ -153,8 +153,9 @@ instructions telling all computers to refuse to let anyone
read that
document. Each computer would obey when it downloads the new
instructions. Your writing would be subject to 1984-style retroactive
erasure. You might be unable to read it yourself.
-</p>
-<p>You might think you can find out what nasty things a treacherous-computing
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ You might think you can find out what nasty things a treacherous-computing
application does, study how painful they are, and decide
whether to accept them. Even if you can find this out, it would
be foolish to accept the deal, but you can’t even expect the deal
@@ -163,8 +164,9 @@ hooked and they know it; then they can change the deal. Some
applications will automatically download upgrades that will do
something different—and they won’t give you a choice about
whether to upgrade.
-</p>
-<p>Today you can avoid being restricted by proprietary software by not
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Today you can avoid being restricted by proprietary software by not
using it. If you run GNU/Linux or another free operating system, and
if you avoid installing proprietary applications on it, then you are
in charge of what your computer does. If a free program has a
@@ -172,8 +174,9 @@ malicious feature, other developers in the community will
take it out,
and you can use the corrected version. You can also run free
application programs and tools on nonfree operating systems; this
falls short of fully giving you freedom, but many users do it.
-</p>
-<p>Treacherous computing puts the existence of free operating systems and
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Treacherous computing puts the existence of free operating systems and
free applications at risk, because you may not be able to run them at
all. Some versions of treacherous computing would require the
operating system to be specifically authorized by a particular
@@ -182,89 +185,123 @@ versions of treacherous computing would require every
program to be
specifically authorized by the operating system developer. You could
not run free applications on such a system. If you did figure out
how, and told someone, that could be a crime.
-</p>
-<p>There are proposals already for US laws that would require all computers to
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ There are proposals already for US laws that would require all computers to
support treacherous computing, and to prohibit connecting old computers to
-the Internet. The
-<a
name="index-Consumer-Broadband-and-Digital-Television-Promotion-Act-_0028CBDTPA_0029-3"></a>
-CBDTPA (we call it the Consume But Don’t Try Programming
+the Internet. The
+ <a
name="index-Consumer-Broadband-and-Digital-Television-Promotion-Act-_0028CBDTPA_0029-3">
+ </a>
+ CBDTPA (we call it the Consume But Don’t Try Programming
Act) is one of them. But even if they don’t legally force you to switch to
treacherous computing, the pressure to accept it may be enormous. Today
-people often use
-<a
name="index-Word_002c-and-treacherous-computing-_0028see-also-treacherous-computing_0029-3"></a>
-Word format for communication, although this causes
+people often use
+ <a
name="index-Word_002c-and-treacherous-computing-_0028see-also-treacherous-computing_0029-3">
+ </a>
+ Word format for communication, although this causes
several sorts of problems (see “We Can Put an End to Word
Attachments,” on address@hidden Word Attachments-pg}{). If only a
treacherous-computing machine can read the
latest Word documents, many people will switch to it, if they view the
situation only in terms of individual action (take it or leave it). To
oppose treacherous computing, we must join together and confront the
situation as a collective choice.
-</p>
-<p>For further information about treacherous computing, see <a
href="http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/users/rja14/tcpa-faq.html";>http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/users/rja14/tcpa-faq.html</a>.
-</p>
-<a name="index-call-to-action_002c-block-treacherous-computing"></a>
-<p>To block treacherous computing will require large numbers of citizens
-to organize. We need your help! Please support
-<a name="index-Defective-by-Design-_0028see-also-DRM_0029-3"></a>
-Defective by Design, the
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ For further information about treacherous computing, see
+ <a href="http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/users/rja14/tcpa-faq.html";>
+ http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/users/rja14/tcpa-faq.html
+ </a>
+ .
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-block-treacherous-computing">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ To block treacherous computing will require large numbers of citizens
+to organize. We need your help! Please support
+ <a name="index-Defective-by-Design-_0028see-also-DRM_0029-3">
+ </a>
+ Defective by Design, the
FSF’s campaign against Digital Restrictions Management.
-</p>
-<a name="Postscripts"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Postscripts </h3>
-
-<ol><li>
-The computer security field uses the term “trusted
+ </p>
+ <a name="Postscripts">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Postscripts
+ </h3>
+ <ol>
+ <li>
+ The computer security field uses the term “trusted
computing” in a different way—beware of confusion
between the two meanings.
-
-</li><li>
-The GNU Project distributes the
-<a name="index-Privacy-Guard-_0028GPG_0029_002c-GNU-1"></a>
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Privacy-Guard-_0028GPG_0029-1"></a>
-<a name="index-GPG-_0028GNU-Privacy-Guard_0029-1"></a>
-GNU Privacy Guard, a program that
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ The GNU Project distributes the
+ <a name="index-Privacy-Guard-_0028GPG_0029_002c-GNU-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Privacy-Guard-_0028GPG_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GPG-_0028GNU-Privacy-Guard_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ GNU Privacy Guard, a program that
implements public-key encryption and digital signatures, which you can
use to send secure and private email. It is useful to explore how GPG
differs from treacherous computing, and see what makes one helpful and
the other so dangerous.
-
-<p>When someone uses GPG to send you an encrypted document, and you use
+ <p>
+ When someone uses GPG to send you an encrypted document, and you use
GPG to decode it, the result is an unencrypted document that you can
read, forward, copy, and even reencrypt to send it securely to
someone else. A treacherous-computing application would let you read
the words on the screen, but would not let you produce an unencrypted
document that you could use in other ways. GPG, a free software
-package, makes security features available to the users; <em>they</em> use
<em>it.</em>
-Treacherous computing is designed to impose restrictions on the users;
-<em>it</em> uses <em>them.</em>
-</p>
-</li><li>
-The supporters of treacherous computing focus their discourse on its
+package, makes security features available to the users;
+ <em>
+ they
+ </em>
+ use
+ <em>
+ it.
+ </em>
+ Treacherous computing is designed to impose restrictions on the users;
+ <em>
+ it
+ </em>
+ uses
+ <em>
+ them.
+ </em>
+ </p>
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ The supporters of treacherous computing focus their discourse on its
beneficial uses. What they say is often
correct, just not important.
-
-<p>Like most hardware, treacherous-computing hardware can be used for
+ <p>
+ Like most hardware, treacherous-computing hardware can be used for
purposes which are not harmful. But these features can be implemented in
other ways, without treacherous-computing hardware. The principal
difference that treacherous computing makes for users is the nasty
consequence: rigging your computer to work against you.
-</p>
-<p>What they say is true, and what I say is true. Put them together and
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ What they say is true, and what I say is true. Put them together and
what do you get? Treacherous computing is a plan to take away our
freedom, while offering minor benefits to distract us from what we
would lose.
-</p>
-</li><li>
-Microsoft presents
-<a
name="index-Microsoft_002c-Palladium-_0028see-also-both-Palladium-and-_0060_0060trusted-computing_0027_0027_0029-1"></a>
-Palladium as a security measure, and claims that
+ </p>
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ Microsoft presents
+ <a
name="index-Microsoft_002c-Palladium-_0028see-also-both-Palladium-and-_0060_0060trusted-computing_0027_0027_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ Palladium as a security measure, and claims that
it will protect against viruses, but this claim is evidently false. A
presentation by Microsoft Research in October 2002 stated that one of
the specifications of Palladium is that existing operating systems and
applications will continue to run; therefore, viruses will continue to
be able to do all the things that they can do today.
-
-<p>When Microsoft employees speak of “security” in connection with
+ <p>
+ When Microsoft employees speak of “security” in connection with
Palladium, they do not mean what we normally mean by that word:
protecting your machine from things you do not want. They mean
protecting your copies of data on your machine from access by you in
@@ -274,8 +311,9 @@ types of secrets Palladium could be used to keep, including
secrets”—but it put “user secrets” in
quotation marks, recognizing that this is somewhat of an absurdity in the
context of Palladium.
-</p>
-<p>The presentation made frequent use of other terms that we frequently
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The presentation made frequent use of other terms that we frequently
associate with the context of security, such as “attack,”
“malicious code,” “spoofing,” as well as
“trusted.” None of them means what it normally means.
@@ -284,19 +322,27 @@ you trying to copy music. “Malicious code” means code
installed by you to do what someone else doesn’t want your machine to
do. “Spoofing” doesn’t mean someone’s fooling you, it means
your fooling Palladium. And so on.
-</p>
-</li><li>
-A previous statement by the Palladium developers stated the basic
+ </p>
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ A previous statement by the Palladium developers stated the basic
premise that whoever developed or collected information should have
total control of how you use it. This would represent a revolutionary
overturn of past ideas of ethics and of the legal system, and create
an unprecedented system of control. The specific problems of these
systems are no accident; they result from the basic goal. It is the
goal we must reject.
-
-</li></ol><a
name="index-_0060_0060trusted-computing_002c_0027_0027-avoid-use-of-term-_0028see-also-treacherous-computing_0029-3"></a>
-<a name="index-treacherous-computing-3"></a>
-<a
name="index-traps_002c-treacherous-computing-_0028see-also-treacherous-computing_0029-1"></a>
-<a name="index-proprietary-software-_0028see-also-software_0029-2"></a>
-<a name="index-Palladium-2"></a>
-<hr size="2"></section></body></html>
+ </li>
+ </ol>
+ <a
name="index-_0060_0060trusted-computing_002c_0027_0027-avoid-use-of-term-_0028see-also-treacherous-computing_0029-3">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-treacherous-computing-3">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-traps_002c-treacherous-computing-_0028see-also-treacherous-computing_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-proprietary-software-_0028see-also-software_0029-2">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Palladium-2">
+ </a>
+ <hr size="2"/>
+</section>
diff --git a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_33.html
b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_33.html
index 71180ca..20d213a 100644
--- a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_33.html
+++ b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_33.html
@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
-<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/loose.dtd";>
-<html><!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
+<!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
Free Software Foundation
@@ -19,337 +18,440 @@ ISBN 978-0-9831592-0-9
Cover design by Rob Myers.
Cover photograph by Peter Hinely.
- --><!-- Created on February 18, 2016 by texi2html 1.82
-texi2html was written by:
- Lionel Cons <address@hidden> (original author)
- Karl Berry <address@hidden>
- Olaf Bachmann <address@hidden>
- and many others.
-Maintained by: Many creative people.
-Send bugs and suggestions to <address@hidden>
---><head><title>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 33. Who Does That Server
Really Serve?</title><meta name="description" content="This is the second
edition of Richard Stallman's collection of essays."><meta name="keywords"
content="Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 33. Who Does That Server Really
Serve?"><meta name="resource-type" content="document"><meta name="distribution"
content="global"><meta name="Generator" content="texi2html 1.82"><meta
http-equiv="Content-Type" content= [...]
-<!--
-a.summary-letter {text-decoration: none}
-blockquote.smallquotation {font-size: smaller}
-pre.display {font-family: serif}
-pre.format {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-comment {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-preformatted {font-family: serif}
-pre.smalldisplay {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallexample {font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallformat {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smalllisp {font-size: smaller}
-span.roman {font-family:serif; font-weight:normal;}
-span.sansserif {font-family:sans-serif; font-weight:normal;}
-ul.toc {list-style: none}
--->
-</style><link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
href="../static/web-common/style.css"></head><body lang="en" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
text="#000000" link="#0000FF" vlink="#800080" alink="#FF0000" class="article">
+ -->
-<a name="Server"></a>
-<header><div id="logo"><a href="/"><img src="../static/gnu.svg" height="100"
width="100"></a></div><h1 class="book-title">Free Software, Free Society, 2nd
ed.</h1></header><section id="main"><a
name="Who-Does-That-Server-Really-Serve_003f"></a>
-<h1 class="chapter"> 33. Who Does That Server Really Serve? </h1>
-
-<a
name="index-Software-as-a-Service-_0028SaaS_0029-_0028see-also-SaaS_0029"></a>
-
-<a name="Background_003a-How-Proprietary-Software-Takes-Away-Your-Freedom"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Background: How Proprietary Software Takes Away Your
Freedom </h3>
-
-<a name="index-spyware"></a>
-<a name="index-SaaS_002c-as-distinguished-from-proprietary-software"></a>
-<a name="index-proprietary-software_002c-as-distinguished-from-SaaS"></a>
-<p>Digital technology can give you freedom; it can also take your freedom
+<section id="main">
+ <a name="Who-Does-That-Server-Really-Serve_003f">
+ </a>
+ <h1 class="chapter">
+ 33. Who Does That Server Really Serve?
+ </h1>
+ <a name="index-Software-as-a-Service-_0028SaaS_0029-_0028see-also-SaaS_0029">
+ </a>
+ <a name="Background_003a-How-Proprietary-Software-Takes-Away-Your-Freedom">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Background: How Proprietary Software Takes Away Your Freedom
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-spyware">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-SaaS_002c-as-distinguished-from-proprietary-software">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-proprietary-software_002c-as-distinguished-from-SaaS">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Digital technology can give you freedom; it can also take your freedom
away. The first threat to our control over our computing came from
-<em>proprietary software</em>: software that the users cannot control
-because the
-<a name="index-ownership_002c-and-users_0027-freedom-2"></a>
-owner (a company such as
-<a name="index-Apple-_0028see-also-DRM_0029-2"></a>
-Apple or Microsoft) controls
+ <em>
+ proprietary software
+ </em>
+ : software that the users cannot control
+because the
+ <a name="index-ownership_002c-and-users_0027-freedom-2">
+ </a>
+ owner (a company such as
+ <a name="index-Apple-_0028see-also-DRM_0029-2">
+ </a>
+ Apple or Microsoft) controls
it. The owner often takes advantage of this unjust power by inserting
-malicious features such as spyware, back doors, and
-<a
name="index-DRM_002c-call-it-_0060_0060Digital-Restrictions-Management_0027_0027-4"></a>
-Digital
+malicious features such as spyware, back doors, and
+ <a
name="index-DRM_002c-call-it-_0060_0060Digital-Restrictions-Management_0027_0027-4">
+ </a>
+ Digital
Restrictions Management (DRM) (referred to as “Digital Rights
Management” in their propaganda).
-</p>
-<p>Our solution to this problem is developing <em>free software</em> and
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Our solution to this problem is developing
+ <em>
+ free software
+ </em>
+ and
rejecting proprietary software. Free software means that you, as a
user, have four essential freedoms: (0) to run the program as you
wish, (1) to study and change the source code so it does what you
wish, (2) to redistribute exact copies, and (3) to
redistribute copies of your modified versions. (See “The Free
Software Definition,”.)
-</p>
-<p>With free software, we, the users, take back control of our
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ With free software, we, the users, take back control of our
computing. Proprietary software still exists, but we can exclude it
from our lives and many of us have done so. However, we now face a
new threat to our control over our computing: Software as a Service.
For our freedom’s sake, we have to reject that too.
-</p>
-<a name="How-Software-as-a-Service-Takes-Away-Your-Freedom"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> How Software as a Service Takes Away Your Freedom </h3>
-
-<p>Software as a Service (SaaS) means that someone sets up a network
+ </p>
+ <a name="How-Software-as-a-Service-Takes-Away-Your-Freedom">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ How Software as a Service Takes Away Your Freedom
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ Software as a Service (SaaS) means that someone sets up a network
server that does certain computing tasks—running spreadsheets,
word processing, translating text into another language,
etc.—then invites users to do their computing on that server.
Users send their data to the server, which does their computing on the
data thus provided, then sends the results back or acts on them
directly.
-</p>
-<p>These servers wrest control from the users even more inexorably
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ These servers wrest control from the users even more inexorably
than proprietary software. With proprietary software, users typically
get an executable file but not the source code. That makes it hard
for programmers to study the code that is running, so it’s hard to
determine what the program really does, and hard to change it.
-</p>
-<p>With SaaS, the users do not have even the executable file: it is on
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ With SaaS, the users do not have even the executable file: it is on
the server, where the users can’t see or touch it. Thus it is
impossible for them to ascertain what it really does, and impossible
to change it.
-</p>
-<p>Furthermore, SaaS automatically leads to harmful consequences
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Furthermore, SaaS automatically leads to harmful consequences
equivalent to the malicious features of certain proprietary software.
For instance, some proprietary programs are “spyware”: the
program sends out data about users’ computing activities. Microsoft
-<a name="index-Windows_002c-SaaS-and"></a>
-Windows sends information about users’ activities to Microsoft.
-<a
name="index-Windows-Media-Player-_0028see-also-both-DRM-and-treacherous-computing_0029-1"></a>
-Windows Media Player and
-<a name="index-RealPlayer-_0028see-also-DRM_0029"></a>
-RealPlayer report what each user watches or
+ <a name="index-Windows_002c-SaaS-and">
+ </a>
+ Windows sends information about users’ activities to Microsoft.
+ <a
name="index-Windows-Media-Player-_0028see-also-both-DRM-and-treacherous-computing_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ Windows Media Player and
+ <a name="index-RealPlayer-_0028see-also-DRM_0029">
+ </a>
+ RealPlayer report what each user watches or
listens to.
-</p>
-
-<p>Unlike proprietary software, SaaS does not require covert code to
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Unlike proprietary software, SaaS does not require covert code to
obtain the user’s data. Instead, users must send their data to the
server in order to use it. This has the same effect as spyware: the
server operator gets the data. He gets it with no special effort, by
the nature of SaaS.
-</p>
-<a name="index-proprietary-software_002c-spying-on-users"></a>
-<p>Some proprietary programs can mistreat users under remote command.
-For instance,
-<a name="index-Windows_002c-SaaS-and-1"></a>
-Windows has a back door with which Microsoft can
-forcibly change any software on the machine. The
-<a name="index-Amazon-1"></a>
-Amazon
-<a name="index-Kindle-_0028see-also-Swindle_0029-1"></a>
-Kindle e-book
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-proprietary-software_002c-spying-on-users">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Some proprietary programs can mistreat users under remote command.
+For instance,
+ <a name="index-Windows_002c-SaaS-and-1">
+ </a>
+ Windows has a back door with which Microsoft can
+forcibly change any software on the machine. The
+ <a name="index-Amazon-1">
+ </a>
+ Amazon
+ <a name="index-Kindle-_0028see-also-Swindle_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ Kindle e-book
reader (whose name suggests it’s intended to burn people’s books) has
an Orwellian back door that Amazon used in 2009
-to remotely delete Kindle copies of
-<a name="index-Orwell_002c-George-1"></a>
-Orwell’s books
-<a name="index-1984_002c-George-Orwell-1"></a>
-<cite>1984</cite> and
-<a name="index-Animal-Farm_002c-George-Orwell"></a>
-<cite>Animal Farm</cite> which the users had purchased from Amazon.<a
name="DOCF49" href="#FOOT49">(49)</a>
-</p>
-<p>SaaS inherently gives the server operator the power to change the
+to remotely delete Kindle copies of
+ <a name="index-Orwell_002c-George-1">
+ </a>
+ Orwell’s books
+ <a name="index-1984_002c-George-Orwell-1">
+ </a>
+ <cite>
+ 1984
+ </cite>
+ and
+ <a name="index-Animal-Farm_002c-George-Orwell">
+ </a>
+ <cite>
+ Animal Farm
+ </cite>
+ which the users had purchased from Amazon.
+ <a href="#FOOT49" name="DOCF49">
+ (49)
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ SaaS inherently gives the server operator the power to change the
software in use, or the users’ data being operated on. Once again, no
special code is needed to do this.
-</p>
-<p>Thus, SaaS is equivalent to total spyware and a gaping wide back
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Thus, SaaS is equivalent to total spyware and a gaping wide back
door, and gives the server operator unjust power over the user. We
can’t accept that.
-<a name="index-spyware-1"></a>
-</p>
-<a name="Untangling-the-SaaS-Issue-from-the-Proprietary-Software-Issue"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Untangling the SaaS Issue from the Proprietary
Software Issue </h3>
-
-<p>SaaS and proprietary software lead to similar harmful results, but
+ <a name="index-spyware-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <a name="Untangling-the-SaaS-Issue-from-the-Proprietary-Software-Issue">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Untangling the SaaS Issue from the Proprietary Software Issue
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ SaaS and proprietary software lead to similar harmful results, but
the causal mechanisms are different. With proprietary software, the
cause is that you have and use a copy which is difficult or illegal to
change. With SaaS, the cause is that you use a copy you don’t
have.
-</p>
-<p>These two issues are often confused, and not only by accident. Web
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ These two issues are often confused, and not only by accident. Web
developers use the vague term “web application” to lump
the server software together with programs run on your machine in your
-browser. Some web pages install nontrivial or even large
-<a name="index-JavaScript"></a>
-JavaScript
+browser. Some web pages install nontrivial or even large
+ <a name="index-JavaScript">
+ </a>
+ JavaScript
programs temporarily into your browser without informing
you. When these JavaScript
programs are nonfree, they are as bad as any other nonfree
software. Here, however, we are concerned with the problem of the
server software itself.
-</p>
-<a name="index-ownership_002c-servers-and-software"></a>
-<p>Many free software supporters assume that the problem of SaaS will
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-ownership_002c-servers-and-software">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Many free software supporters assume that the problem of SaaS will
be solved by developing free software for servers. For the server
operator’s sake, the programs on the server had better be free; if
they are proprietary, their owners have power over the server. That’s
unfair to the operator, and doesn’t help you at all. But if the
-programs on the server are free, that doesn’t protect you <em>as the
-server’s user</em> from the effects of SaaS. They give freedom to the
+programs on the server are free, that doesn’t protect you
+ <em>
+ as the
+server’s user
+ </em>
+ from the effects of SaaS. They give freedom to the
operator, but not to you.
-</p>
-<p>Releasing the server software source code does benefit the
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Releasing the server software source code does benefit the
community: suitably skilled users can set up similar servers, perhaps
changing the software. But none of these servers would give you
-control over computing you do on it, unless it’s <em>your</em> server.
+control over computing you do on it, unless it’s
+ <em>
+ your
+ </em>
+ server.
The rest would all be SaaS. SaaS always subjects you to the power of
-the server operator, and the only remedy is, <em>Don’t use SaaS!</em>
-Don’t use someone else’s server to do your own computing on data
+the server operator, and the only remedy is,
+ <em>
+ Don’t use SaaS!
+ </em>
+ Don’t use someone else’s server to do your own computing on data
provided by you.
-<a name="index-SaaS_002c-as-distinguished-from-proprietary-software-1"></a>
-<a name="index-proprietary-software_002c-as-distinguished-from-SaaS-1"></a>
-</p>
-<a name="Distinguishing-SaaS-from-Other-Network-Services"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Distinguishing SaaS from Other Network Services </h3>
-
-<a name="index-SaaS_002c-as-distinguished-from-other-network-services"></a>
-<p>Does condemning SaaS mean rejecting all network servers? Not at
+ <a name="index-SaaS_002c-as-distinguished-from-proprietary-software-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-proprietary-software_002c-as-distinguished-from-SaaS-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <a name="Distinguishing-SaaS-from-Other-Network-Services">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Distinguishing SaaS from Other Network Services
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-SaaS_002c-as-distinguished-from-other-network-services">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Does condemning SaaS mean rejecting all network servers? Not at
all. Most servers do not raise this issue, because the job you do
with them isn’t your own computing except in a trivial sense.
-</p>
-<p>The original purpose of web servers wasn’t to do computing for you,
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The original purpose of web servers wasn’t to do computing for you,
it was to publish information for you to access. Even today this is
what most web sites do, and it doesn’t pose the SaaS problem, because
accessing someone’s published information isn’t a matter of doing your
own computing. Neither is publishing your own materials via a blog
-site or a microblogging service such as
-<a name="index-Twitter"></a>
-Twitter or
-<a name="index-identi_002eca"></a>
-identi.ca. The same goes for
+site or a microblogging service such as
+ <a name="index-Twitter">
+ </a>
+ Twitter or
+ <a name="index-identi_002eca">
+ </a>
+ identi.ca. The same goes for
communication not meant to be private, such as chat groups. Social
networking can extend into SaaS; however, at root it is just a method
of communication and publication, not SaaS. If you use the service
for minor editing of what you’re going to communicate, that is not a
significant issue.
-</p>
-<p>Services such as search engines collect data from around the web
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Services such as search engines collect data from around the web
and let you examine it. Looking through their collection of data
isn’t your own computing in the usual sense—you didn’t provide
that collection—so using such a service to search the web is not
SaaS. (However, using someone else’s search engine to implement a
-search facility for your own site <em>is</em> SaaS.)
-</p>
-<a name="index-SaaS_002c-e_002dcommerce-and"></a>
-<a name="index-e_002dcommerce"></a>
-<p>E-commerce is not SaaS, because the computing isn’t solely yours;
+search facility for your own site
+ <em>
+ is
+ </em>
+ SaaS.)
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-SaaS_002c-e_002dcommerce-and">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-e_002dcommerce">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ E-commerce is not SaaS, because the computing isn’t solely yours;
rather, it is done jointly for you and another party. So there’s no
particular reason why you alone should expect to control that
computing. The real issue in e-commerce is whether you trust the
other party with your money and personal information.
-</p>
-<a name="index-SaaS_002c-joint-projects-and"></a>
-<p>Using a joint project’s servers isn’t SaaS because the computing
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-SaaS_002c-joint-projects-and">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Using a joint project’s servers isn’t SaaS because the computing
you do in this way isn’t yours personally. For instance, if you edit
-pages on
-<a name="index-Wikipedia-1"></a>
-Wikipedia, you are not doing your own computing; rather, you
+pages on
+ <a name="index-Wikipedia-1">
+ </a>
+ Wikipedia, you are not doing your own computing; rather, you
are collaborating in Wikipedia’s computing.
-</p>
-<p>Wikipedia controls its own servers, but groups can face the problem
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Wikipedia controls its own servers, but groups can face the problem
of SaaS if they do their group activities on someone else’s server.
-<a name="index-SaaS_002c-development-hosting-sites-and"></a>
-Fortunately, development hosting sites such as
-<a name="index-SaaS_002c-Savannah-and"></a>
-<a name="index-Savannah"></a>
-Savannah and
-<a name="index-SaaS_002c-SourceForge-and"></a>
-<a name="index-SourceForge-1"></a>
-SourceForge don’t pose the SaaS problem, because what groups do there
+ <a name="index-SaaS_002c-development-hosting-sites-and">
+ </a>
+ Fortunately, development hosting sites such as
+ <a name="index-SaaS_002c-Savannah-and">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Savannah">
+ </a>
+ Savannah and
+ <a name="index-SaaS_002c-SourceForge-and">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-SourceForge-1">
+ </a>
+ SourceForge don’t pose the SaaS problem, because what groups do there
is mainly publication and public communication, rather than their own
private computing.
-</p>
-<a name="index-SaaS_002c-multiplayer-games"></a>
-<a name="index-games_002c-SaaS-and-multiplayer"></a>
-<p>Multiplayer games are a group activity carried out on someone
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-SaaS_002c-multiplayer-games">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-games_002c-SaaS-and-multiplayer">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Multiplayer games are a group activity carried out on someone
else’s server, which makes them SaaS. But where the data involved is
just the state of play and the score, the worst wrong the operator
might commit is favoritism. You might well ignore that risk, since it
seems unlikely and very little is at stake. On the other hand, when
the game becomes more than just a game, the issue changes.
-</p>
-<a name="index-Google-Docs"></a>
-<a name="index-SaaS_002c-Google-Docs-as-example-of"></a>
-<p>Which online services are SaaS? Google Docs is a clear example.
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-Google-Docs">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-SaaS_002c-Google-Docs-as-example-of">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Which online services are SaaS? Google Docs is a clear example.
Its basic activity is editing, and Google encourages people to use it
for their own editing; this is SaaS. It offers the added feature of
collaborative editing, but adding participants doesn’t alter the fact
that editing on the server is SaaS. (In addition, Google Docs is
-unacceptable because it installs a large nonfree
-<a name="index-JavaScript-1"></a>
-JavaScript program
+unacceptable because it installs a large nonfree
+ <a name="index-JavaScript-1">
+ </a>
+ JavaScript program
into the users’ browsers.) If using a service for communication or
collaboration requires doing substantial parts of your own computing
with it too, that computing is SaaS even if the communication is
not.
-</p>
-<a name="index-SaaS_002c-sites-offering-multiple-services_002c-including"></a>
-<p>Some sites offer multiple services, and if one is not SaaS, another
-may be SaaS. For instance, the main service of
-<a name="index-Facebook"></a>
-<a name="index-SaaS_002c-Facebook-and"></a>
-Facebook is social
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-SaaS_002c-sites-offering-multiple-services_002c-including">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Some sites offer multiple services, and if one is not SaaS, another
+may be SaaS. For instance, the main service of
+ <a name="index-Facebook">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-SaaS_002c-Facebook-and">
+ </a>
+ Facebook is social
networking, and that is not SaaS; however, it supports third-party
-applications, some of which may be SaaS.
-<a name="index-Flickr"></a>
-<a name="index-SaaS_002c-Flickr-and"></a>
-Flickr’s main service is
+applications, some of which may be SaaS.
+ <a name="index-Flickr">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-SaaS_002c-Flickr-and">
+ </a>
+ Flickr’s main service is
distributing photos, which is not SaaS, but it also has features for
editing photos, which is SaaS.
-</p>
-<a name="index-SaaS_002c-publication_002dand_002dcommunication-sites-and"></a>
-<p>Some sites whose main service is publication and communication
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-SaaS_002c-publication_002dand_002dcommunication-sites-and">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Some sites whose main service is publication and communication
extend it with “contact management”: keeping track of
people you have relationships with. Sending mail to those people for
you is not SaaS, but keeping track of your dealings with them, if
substantial, is SaaS.
-</p>
-<p>If a service is not SaaS, that does not mean it is OK. There are
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ If a service is not SaaS, that does not mean it is OK. There are
other bad things a service can do. For instance, Facebook distributes
video in Flash, which pressures users to run nonfree software, and it
gives users a misleading impression of privacy. Those are important
issues too, but this article’s concern is the issue of SaaS.
-</p>
-<a
name="index-_0060_0060cloud-computing_002c_0027_0027-avoid-use-of-term-1"></a>
-<a
name="index-SaaS_002c-_0060_0060cloud-computing_0027_0027-obfuscating-problems-posed-by"></a>
-<p>The IT industry discourages users from considering these
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-_0060_0060cloud-computing_002c_0027_0027-avoid-use-of-term-1">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-SaaS_002c-_0060_0060cloud-computing_0027_0027-obfuscating-problems-posed-by">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The IT industry discourages users from considering these
distinctions. That’s what the buzzword “cloud computing”
is for. This term is so nebulous that it could refer to almost any
use of the Internet. It includes SaaS and it includes nearly
everything else. The term only lends itself to uselessly broad
statements.
-</p>
-<p>The real meaning of “cloud computing” is to suggest a
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The real meaning of “cloud computing” is to suggest a
devil-may-care approach towards your computing. It says, “Don’t
ask questions, just trust every business without hesitation. Don’t
worry about who controls your computing or who holds your data. Don’t
check for a hook hidden inside our service before you swallow
it.” In other words, “Think like a sucker.” I prefer
to avoid the term.
-<a name="index-SaaS_002c-as-distinguished-from-other-network-services-1"></a>
-</p>
-<a name="Dealing-with-the-SaaS-Problem"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Dealing with the SaaS Problem </h3>
-
-<a name="index-SaaS_002c-dealing-with-problem-of"></a>
-<a name="index-call-to-action_002c-SaaS-threats"></a>
-<p>Only a small fraction of all web sites do SaaS; most don’t raise
+ <a name="index-SaaS_002c-as-distinguished-from-other-network-services-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <a name="Dealing-with-the-SaaS-Problem">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Dealing with the SaaS Problem
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-SaaS_002c-dealing-with-problem-of">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-SaaS-threats">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Only a small fraction of all web sites do SaaS; most don’t raise
the issue. But what should we do about the ones that raise it?
-</p>
-<p>For the simple case, where you are doing your own computing on data in
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ For the simple case, where you are doing your own computing on data in
your own hands, the solution is simple: use your own copy of a free
software application. Do your text editing with your copy of a free
-text editor such as
-<a name="index-Emacs_002c-GNU-8"></a>
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Emacs-8"></a>
-GNU Emacs or a free word
-<a name="index-processors-1"></a>
-processor. Do your photo
-editing with your copy of free software such as
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GIMP-1"></a>
-<a name="index-GIMP-1"></a>
-GIMP.
-</p>
-<p>But what about collaborating with other individuals? It may be
+text editor such as
+ <a name="index-Emacs_002c-GNU-8">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Emacs-8">
+ </a>
+ GNU Emacs or a free word
+ <a name="index-processors-1">
+ </a>
+ processor. Do your photo
+editing with your copy of free software such as
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GIMP-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GIMP-1">
+ </a>
+ GIMP.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ But what about collaborating with other individuals? It may be
hard to do this at present without using a server. If you use one,
don’t trust a server run by a company. A mere contract as a customer
is no protection unless you could detect a breach and could really
@@ -357,44 +459,78 @@ sue, and the company probably writes its contracts to
permit a broad
range of abuses. Police can subpoena your data from the company with
less basis than required to subpoena them from you, supposing the
company doesn’t volunteer them like the US phone companies that
-illegally wiretapped their customers for
-<a name="index-Bush_002c-President-George-W_002e"></a>
-Bush. If you must use a
+illegally wiretapped their customers for
+ <a name="index-Bush_002c-President-George-W_002e">
+ </a>
+ Bush. If you must use a
server, use a server whose operators give you a basis for trust beyond
a mere commercial relationship.
-</p>
-<p>However, on a longer time scale, we can create alternatives to
-using servers. For instance, we can create a
-<a name="index-peer_002dto_002dpeer-3"></a>
-peer-to-peer program
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ However, on a longer time scale, we can create alternatives to
+using servers. For instance, we can create a
+ <a name="index-peer_002dto_002dpeer-3">
+ </a>
+ peer-to-peer program
through which collaborators can share data encrypted. The free
software community should develop distributed peer-to-peer
replacements for important “web applications.” It may be
-wise to release them under GNU
-<a
name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Affero-General-Public-License-_0028AGPL_0029-1"></a>
-<a name="index-Affero-General-Public-License-_0028AGPL_0029_002c-GNU-1"></a>
-Affero GPL, since
+wise to release them under GNU
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Affero-General-Public-License-_0028AGPL_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Affero-General-Public-License-_0028AGPL_0029_002c-GNU-1">
+ </a>
+ Affero GPL, since
they are likely candidates for being converted into server-based
-programs by someone else. The
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Project-8"></a>
-GNU Project is looking
+programs by someone else. The
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Project-8">
+ </a>
+ GNU Project is looking
for volunteers to work on such replacements. We also invite other
free software projects to consider this issue in their design.
-</p>
-<p>In the meantime, if a company invites you to use its server to do
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ In the meantime, if a company invites you to use its server to do
your own computing tasks, don’t yield; don’t use SaaS. Don’t buy or
install “thin clients,” which are simply computers so weak
they make you do the real work on a server, unless you’re
-going to use them with <em>your</em> server. Use a real
+going to use them with
+ <em>
+ your
+ </em>
+ server. Use a real
computer and keep your data there. Do your work with your own copy of
a free program, for your freedom’s sake.
-<a name="index-call-to-action_002c-SaaS-threats-1"></a>
-<a name="index-SaaS_002c-dealing-with-problem-of-1"></a>
-<a
name="index-Software-as-a-Service-_0028SaaS_0029-_0028see-also-SaaS_0029-1"></a>
-</p><div class="footnote">
-<hr><h3>Footnotes</h3>
-<h3><a name="FOOT49" href="#DOCF49">(49)</a></h3>
-<p>Brad
-Stone, “Amazon Erases Orwell Books from Kindle,” <cite>New York Times,</cite>
17 July 2009, sec. B1, <a
href="http://nytimes.com/2009/07/18/technology/companies/18amazon.html";>http://nytimes.com/2009/07/18/technology/companies/18amazon.html</a>.
-</p></div>
-<hr size="2"></section></body></html>
+ <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-SaaS-threats-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-SaaS_002c-dealing-with-problem-of-1">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-Software-as-a-Service-_0028SaaS_0029-_0028see-also-SaaS_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <div class="footnote">
+ <hr>
+ <h3>
+ Footnotes
+ </h3>
+ <h3>
+ <a href="#DOCF49" name="FOOT49">
+ (49)
+ </a>
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ Brad
+Stone, “Amazon Erases Orwell Books from Kindle,”
+ <cite>
+ New York Times,
+ </cite>
+ 17 July 2009, sec. B1,
+ <a href="http://nytimes.com/2009/07/18/technology/companies/18amazon.html";>
+ http://nytimes.com/2009/07/18/technology/companies/18amazon.html
+ </a>
+ .
+ </p>
+ </hr>
+ </div>
+ <hr size="2"/>
+</section>
diff --git a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_34.html
b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_34.html
index 9153cee..4a3f104 100644
--- a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_34.html
+++ b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_34.html
@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
-<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/loose.dtd";>
-<html><!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
+<!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
Free Software Foundation
@@ -19,83 +18,90 @@ ISBN 978-0-9831592-0-9
Cover design by Rob Myers.
Cover photograph by Peter Hinely.
- --><!-- Created on February 18, 2016 by texi2html 1.82
-texi2html was written by:
- Lionel Cons <address@hidden> (original author)
- Karl Berry <address@hidden>
- Olaf Bachmann <address@hidden>
- and many others.
-Maintained by: Many creative people.
-Send bugs and suggestions to <address@hidden>
---><head><title>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 34. Free but Shackled:
The Java Trap</title><meta name="description" content="This is the second
edition of Richard Stallman's collection of essays."><meta name="keywords"
content="Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 34. Free but Shackled: The Java
Trap"><meta name="resource-type" content="document"><meta name="distribution"
content="global"><meta name="Generator" content="texi2html 1.82"><meta
http-equiv="Content-Type" content="tex [...]
-<!--
-a.summary-letter {text-decoration: none}
-blockquote.smallquotation {font-size: smaller}
-pre.display {font-family: serif}
-pre.format {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-comment {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-preformatted {font-family: serif}
-pre.smalldisplay {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallexample {font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallformat {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smalllisp {font-size: smaller}
-span.roman {font-family:serif; font-weight:normal;}
-span.sansserif {font-family:sans-serif; font-weight:normal;}
-ul.toc {list-style: none}
--->
-</style><link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
href="../static/web-common/style.css"></head><body lang="en" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
text="#000000" link="#0000FF" vlink="#800080" alink="#FF0000" class="article">
+ -->
-<a name="Java-Trap"></a>
-<header><div id="logo"><a href="/"><img src="../static/gnu.svg" height="100"
width="100"></a></div><h1 class="book-title">Free Software, Free Society, 2nd
ed.</h1></header><section id="main"><a
name="Free-but-Shackled_003a-The-Java-Trap"></a>
-<h1 class="chapter"> 34. Free but Shackled: The Java Trap </h1>
-
-
-<blockquote class="smallquotation"><p>Since this article was first published,
on 12 April 2004, Sun has relicensed most of its Java platform reference
+<section id="main">
+ <a name="Free-but-Shackled_003a-The-Java-Trap">
+ </a>
+ <h1 class="chapter">
+ 34. Free but Shackled: The Java Trap
+ </h1>
+ <blockquote class="smallquotation">
+ <p>
+ Since this article was first published, on 12 April 2004, Sun has
relicensed most of its Java platform reference
implementation under the GNU General Public License, and there is now
a free development environment for Java. Thus, the Java language as
-such is no longer a trap.<br></p>
-<p>You must be careful, however, because not every Java platform is
+such is no longer a trap.
+ <br/>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ You must be careful, however, because not every Java platform is
free. Sun continues distributing an executable Java platform which is
-nonfree, and other companies do so too.<br></p>
-<p>The free environment for Java is called IcedTea; the source code Sun
+nonfree, and other companies do so too.
+ <br/>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The free environment for Java is called IcedTea; the source code Sun
freed is included in that. So that is the one you should use. Many
GNU/Linux distributions come with IcedTea, but some include nonfree
-Java platforms.<br></p>
-<p>To reliably ensure your Java programs run fine in a free environment,
+Java platforms.
+ <br/>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ To reliably ensure your Java programs run fine in a free environment,
you need to develop them using IcedTea. Theoretically the Java
-platforms should be compatible, but they are not compatible 100
percent.<br></p>
-<p>In addition, there are nonfree programs with “Java” in their name,
+platforms should be compatible, but they are not compatible 100 percent.
+ <br/>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ In addition, there are nonfree programs with “Java” in their name,
such as JavaFX, and there are nonfree Java packages you might find
tempting but need to reject. So check the licenses of whatever
packages you plan to use. If you use Swing, make sure to use the free
-version, which comes with IcedTea.<br></p>
-<p>Aside from those Java specifics, the general issue described here
+version, which comes with IcedTea.
+ <br/>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Aside from those Java specifics, the general issue described here
remains important, because any nonfree library or programming platform
can cause a similar problem. We must learn a lesson from the history
-of Java, so we can avoid other traps in the future.<br></p></blockquote>
-
-<a name="index-traps_002c-nonfree-libraries-2"></a>
-<a name="index-libraries-_0028comp_002e_0029_002c-as-traps-1"></a>
-<a name="index-Java-1"></a>
-<a name="index-Sun-Microsystems-2"></a>
-<a name="index-Swing-library"></a>
-<a name="index-JavaFX"></a>
-<a name="index-IcedTea-_0028see-also-Java_0029"></a>
-<p>If your program is free software, it is basically ethical—but
+of Java, so we can avoid other traps in the future.
+ <br/>
+ </p>
+ </blockquote>
+ <a name="index-traps_002c-nonfree-libraries-2">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-libraries-_0028comp_002e_0029_002c-as-traps-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Java-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Sun-Microsystems-2">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Swing-library">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-JavaFX">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-IcedTea-_0028see-also-Java_0029">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ If your program is free software, it is basically ethical—but
there is a trap you must be on guard for. Your program, though in
itself free, may be restricted by nonfree software that it depends
on. Since the problem is most prominent today for Java programs, we
call it the Java Trap.
-</p>
-<p>A program is free software if its users have certain crucial
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ A program is free software if its users have certain crucial
freedoms. Roughly speaking, they are: the freedom to run the program,
the freedom to study and change the source, the freedom to
redistribute the source and binaries, and the freedom to publish
improved versions. (See “The Free Software Definition,” on address@hidden)
Whether any given program in source form is free software
depends solely on the meaning of its license.
-</p>
-<a name="index-traps_002c-nonfree-dependencies"></a>
-<p>Whether the program can be used in the Free World, used by people
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-traps_002c-nonfree-dependencies">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Whether the program can be used in the Free World, used by people
who mean to live in freedom, is a more complex question. This is not
determined by the program’s own license alone, because no program
works in isolation. Every program depends on other programs. For
@@ -107,63 +113,81 @@ processes. All of these programs are dependencies.
Dependencies may
be necessary for the program to run at all, or they may be necessary
only for certain features. Either way, all or part of the program
cannot operate without the dependencies.
-</p>
-<p>If some of a program’s dependencies are nonfree, this means that all
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ If some of a program’s dependencies are nonfree, this means that all
or part of the program is unable to run in an entirely free
system—it is unusable in the Free World. Sure, we could redistribute
the program and have copies on our machines, but that’s not much good
if it won’t run. That program is free software, but it is effectively
shackled by its nonfree dependencies.
-</p>
-<p>This problem can occur in any kind of software, in any language. For
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ This problem can occur in any kind of software, in any language. For
instance, a free program that only runs on Microsoft
-<a name="index-Windows-3"></a>
-Windows is clearly useless in the Free World. But software that runs
+ <a name="index-Windows-3">
+ </a>
+ Windows is clearly useless in the Free World. But software that runs
on GNU/Linux can also be useless if it depends on other nonfree
software. In the past,
-<a name="index-Motif-_0028see-also-LessTif_0029-3"></a>
-Motif (before we had
-<a name="index-LessTif-_0028see-also-Motif_0029-3"></a>
-LessTif) and
-<a name="index-Qt-3"></a>
-Qt (before its developers made it free software) were major causes of
+ <a name="index-Motif-_0028see-also-LessTif_0029-3">
+ </a>
+ Motif (before we had
+ <a name="index-LessTif-_0028see-also-Motif_0029-3">
+ </a>
+ LessTif) and
+ <a name="index-Qt-3">
+ </a>
+ Qt (before its developers made it free software) were major causes of
this problem. Most 3D video cards work fully only with nonfree
drivers, which also cause this problem. But the major source of this
problem today is Java, because people who write free software often
feel Java is sexy. Blinded by their attraction to the language, they
overlook the issue of dependencies and fall into the Java Trap.
-</p>
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GCJ"></a>
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Classpath"></a>
-<p>Sun’s implementation of Java is nonfree. The standard Java libraries
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GCJ">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Classpath">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Sun’s implementation of Java is nonfree. The standard Java libraries
are nonfree also. We do have free implementations of Java, such as the
GNU Compiler for Java (GCJ) and GNU Classpath, but they don’t support
all the features yet. We are still catching up.
-</p>
-<p>If you develop a Java program on Sun’s Java platform, you are liable
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ If you develop a Java program on Sun’s Java platform, you are liable
to use Sun-only features without even noticing. By the time you find
this out, you may have been using them for months, and redoing the
work could take more months. You might say, “It’s too much work to
start over.” Then your program will have fallen into the Java Trap;
it will be unusable in the Free World.
-</p>
-<p>The reliable way to avoid the Java Trap is to have only a free
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The reliable way to avoid the Java Trap is to have only a free
implementation of Java on your system. Then if you use a Java feature
or library that free software does not yet support, you will find out
straightaway, and you can rewrite that code immediately.
-</p>
-<p>Sun continues to develop additional “standard” Java libraries, and
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Sun continues to develop additional “standard” Java libraries, and
nearly all of them are nonfree; in many cases, even a library’s
specification is a trade secret, and Sun’s latest license for these
specifications prohibits release of anything less than a full
implementation of the specification. (See
-<a
href="http://jcp.org/aboutJava/communityprocess/JSPA2.pdf";>http://jcp.org/aboutJava/communityprocess/JSPA2.pdf</a>
-and
-<a
href="http://jcp.org/aboutJava/communityprocess/final/jsr129/j2me_pb-1_0-fr-spec-license.html";>http://jcp.org/aboutJava/communityprocess/final/jsr129/j2me_pb-1_0-fr-spec-license.html</a>
-for examples.)
-<a name="index-Sun-Microsystems-3"></a>
-</p>
-<p>Fortunately, that specification license does permit releasing an
+ <a href="http://jcp.org/aboutJava/communityprocess/JSPA2.pdf";>
+ http://jcp.org/aboutJava/communityprocess/JSPA2.pdf
+ </a>
+ and
+ <a
href="http://jcp.org/aboutJava/communityprocess/final/jsr129/j2me_pb-1_0-fr-spec-license.html";>
+
http://jcp.org/aboutJava/communityprocess/final/jsr129/j2me_pb-1_0-fr-spec-license.html
+ </a>
+ for examples.)
+ <a name="index-Sun-Microsystems-3">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Fortunately, that specification license does permit releasing an
implementation as free software; others who receive the library can be
allowed to change it and are not required to adhere to the
specification. But the requirement has the effect of prohibiting the
@@ -171,51 +195,68 @@ use of a collaborative development model to produce the
free
implementation. Use of that model would entail publishing incomplete
versions, something those who have read the spec are not allowed to
do.
-</p>
-<p>In the early days of the free software movement, it was impossible
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ In the early days of the free software movement, it was impossible
to avoid depending on nonfree programs. Before we had the GNU C
-compiler, every
-<a name="index-C-programs-2"></a>
-C program (free or not) depended on a nonfree C
-compiler. Before we had the
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-C-Library-5"></a>
-GNU C library, every program depended on a
-nonfree
-<a name="index-C-library-6"></a>
-<a name="index-libraries-_0028comp_002e_0029_002c-C-6"></a>
-C library. Before we had Linux, the first free kernel, every
+compiler, every
+ <a name="index-C-programs-2">
+ </a>
+ C program (free or not) depended on a nonfree C
+compiler. Before we had the
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-C-Library-5">
+ </a>
+ GNU C library, every program depended on a
+nonfree
+ <a name="index-C-library-6">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-libraries-_0028comp_002e_0029_002c-C-6">
+ </a>
+ C library. Before we had Linux, the first free kernel, every
program depended on a nonfree kernel. Before we had BASH, every
shell
script had to be interpreted by a nonfree shell. It was inevitable
that our first programs would initially be hampered by these
dependencies, but we accepted this because our plan included rescuing
-them subsequently. Our overall goal, a self-hosting
-<a name="index-GNU-_0028see-also-both-software-and-GNU_0029-8"></a>
-GNU operating
+them subsequently. Our overall goal, a self-hosting
+ <a name="index-GNU-_0028see-also-both-software-and-GNU_0029-8">
+ </a>
+ GNU operating
system, included free replacements for all those dependencies; if we
reached the goal, all our programs would be rescued. Thus it happened:
with the GNU/Linux system, we can now run these programs on free
platforms.
-</p>
-<p>The situation is different today. We now have powerful free
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The situation is different today. We now have powerful free
operating systems and many free programming tools. Whatever job you
want to do, you can do it on a free platform; there is no need to
accept a nonfree dependency even temporarily. The main reason people
fall into the trap today is because they are not thinking about
it. The easiest solution to the problem is to teach people to
recognize it and not fall into it.
-</p>
-<p>To keep your Java code safe from the Java Trap, install a free Java
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ To keep your Java code safe from the Java Trap, install a free Java
development environment and use it. More generally, whatever language
you use, keep your eyes open, and check the free status of programs
your code depends on. The easiest way to verify that a program is free
is by looking for it in the Free Software Directory
-(<a href="http://fsf.org/directory";>http://fsf.org/directory</a>). If a
program is not in the
+(
+ <a href="http://fsf.org/directory";>
+ http://fsf.org/directory
+ </a>
+ ). If a program is not in the
directory, you can check its license(s) against the list of free
software licenses
-(<a
href="http://gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html";>http://gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html</a>).
-</p>
-<p>We are trying to rescue the trapped Java programs, so if you like
+(
+ <a href="http://gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html";>
+ http://gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html
+ </a>
+ ).
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ We are trying to rescue the trapped Java programs, so if you like
the Java language, we invite you to help in developing GNU
Classpath. Trying your programs with the GCJ Compiler and GNU
Classpath, and reporting any problems you encounter in classes already
@@ -224,10 +265,18 @@ take time; if more nonfree libraries continue to be
added, we may
never have all the latest ones. So please don’t put your free software
in shackles. When you write an application program today, write it to
run on free facilities from the start.
-<a name="index-libraries-_0028comp_002e_0029_002c-as-traps-2"></a>
-<a name="index-traps_002c-nonfree-libraries-3"></a>
-<a name="index-Java-2"></a>
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GCJ-1"></a>
-<a name="index-traps_002c-nonfree-dependencies-1"></a>
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Classpath-1"></a>
-</p><hr size="2"></section></body></html>
+ <a name="index-libraries-_0028comp_002e_0029_002c-as-traps-2">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-traps_002c-nonfree-libraries-3">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Java-2">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GCJ-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-traps_002c-nonfree-dependencies-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Classpath-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <hr size="2"/>
+</section>
diff --git a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_35.html
b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_35.html
index 8962780..723fd18 100644
--- a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_35.html
+++ b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_35.html
@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
-<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/loose.dtd";>
-<html><!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
+<!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
Free Software Foundation
@@ -19,108 +18,104 @@ ISBN 978-0-9831592-0-9
Cover design by Rob Myers.
Cover photograph by Peter Hinely.
- --><!-- Created on February 18, 2016 by texi2html 1.82
-texi2html was written by:
- Lionel Cons <address@hidden> (original author)
- Karl Berry <address@hidden>
- Olaf Bachmann <address@hidden>
- and many others.
-Maintained by: Many creative people.
-Send bugs and suggestions to <address@hidden>
---><head><title>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 35. The JavaScript
Trap</title><meta name="description" content="This is the second edition of
Richard Stallman's collection of essays."><meta name="keywords" content="Free
Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 35. The JavaScript Trap"><meta
name="resource-type" content="document"><meta name="distribution"
content="global"><meta name="Generator" content="texi2html 1.82"><meta
http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><st [...]
-<!--
-a.summary-letter {text-decoration: none}
-blockquote.smallquotation {font-size: smaller}
-pre.display {font-family: serif}
-pre.format {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-comment {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-preformatted {font-family: serif}
-pre.smalldisplay {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallexample {font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallformat {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smalllisp {font-size: smaller}
-span.roman {font-family:serif; font-weight:normal;}
-span.sansserif {font-family:sans-serif; font-weight:normal;}
-ul.toc {list-style: none}
--->
-</style><link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
href="../static/web-common/style.css"></head><body lang="en" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
text="#000000" link="#0000FF" vlink="#800080" alink="#FF0000" class="article">
+ -->
-<a name="JavaScript-Trap"></a>
-<header><div id="logo"><a href="/"><img src="../static/gnu.svg" height="100"
width="100"></a></div><h1 class="book-title">Free Software, Free Society, 2nd
ed.</h1></header><section id="main"><a name="The-JavaScript-Trap"></a>
-<h1 class="chapter"> 35. The JavaScript Trap </h1>
-
-<a name="index-JavaScript-2"></a>
-<a name="index-traps_002c-JavaScript"></a>
-<p>In the free software community, the idea that nonfree programs
+<section id="main">
+ <a name="The-JavaScript-Trap">
+ </a>
+ <h1 class="chapter">
+ 35. The JavaScript Trap
+ </h1>
+ <a name="index-JavaScript-2">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-traps_002c-JavaScript">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ In the free software community, the idea that nonfree programs
mistreat their users is familiar. Some of us refuse entirely to
install proprietary software, and many others consider nonfreedom a
strike against the program. Many users are aware that this issue
applies to the plug-ins that browsers offer to install, since they can
be free or nonfree.
-</p>
-<p>But browsers run other nonfree programs which they don’t ask you
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ But browsers run other nonfree programs which they don’t ask you
about or even tell you about—programs that web pages contain or
link to. These programs are most often written in JavaScript, though
other languages are also used.
-</p>
-<p>JavaScript (officially called
-<a name="index-ECMAScript"></a>
-ECMAScript, but few use that name) was
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ JavaScript (officially called
+ <a name="index-ECMAScript">
+ </a>
+ ECMAScript, but few use that name) was
once used for minor frills in web pages, such as cute but inessential
navigation and display features. It was acceptable to consider these
-as mere extensions of
-<a name="index-HTML-1"></a>
-HTML markup, rather than as true software; they
+as mere extensions of
+ <a name="index-HTML-1">
+ </a>
+ HTML markup, rather than as true software; they
did not constitute a significant issue.
-</p>
-<p>Many sites still use JavaScript that way, but some use it for major
-programs that do large jobs. For instance,
-<a name="index-Google-Docs-1"></a>
-Google Docs downloads into
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Many sites still use JavaScript that way, but some use it for major
+programs that do large jobs. For instance,
+ <a name="index-Google-Docs-1">
+ </a>
+ Google Docs downloads into
your machine a JavaScript program which measures half a megabyte, in a
compacted form that we could call Obfuscript because it has no
comments and hardly any whitespace, and the method names are one
letter long. The source code of a program is the preferred form for
modifying it; the compacted code is not source code, and the real
source code of this program is not available to the user.
-</p>
-<p>Browsers don’t normally tell you when they load JavaScript programs.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Browsers don’t normally tell you when they load JavaScript programs.
Most browsers have a way to turn off JavaScript entirely, but none of
them can check for JavaScript programs that are nontrivial and
nonfree. Even if you’re aware of this issue, it would take you
considerable trouble to identify and then block those programs.
However, even in the free software community most users are not aware
of this issue; the browsers’ silence tends to conceal it.
-</p>
-<p>It is possible to release a JavaScript program as free software, by
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ It is possible to release a JavaScript program as free software, by
distributing the source code under a free software license. But even
if the program’s source is available, there is no easy way to run your
modified version instead of the original. Current free browsers do
not offer a facility to run your own modified version instead of the
-one delivered in the page. The effect is comparable to
-<a name="index-tivoization-4"></a>
-tivoization,
+one delivered in the page. The effect is comparable to
+ <a name="index-tivoization-4">
+ </a>
+ tivoization,
although not quite so hard to overcome.
-</p>
-<p>JavaScript is not the only language web sites use for programs sent to
-the user.
-<a name="index-Flash"></a>
-Flash supports programming through an extended variant of
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ JavaScript is not the only language web sites use for programs sent to
+the user.
+ <a name="index-Flash">
+ </a>
+ Flash supports programming through an extended variant of
JavaScript. We will need to study the issue of Flash to make suitable
recommendations. Silverlight seems likely to create a problem similar
to Flash, except worse, since Microsoft uses it as a platform for
-nonfree codecs. A free replacement for
-<a name="index-Silverlight-_0028see-also-Microsoft_0029"></a>
-Silverlight does not do the job
+nonfree codecs. A free replacement for
+ <a name="index-Silverlight-_0028see-also-Microsoft_0029">
+ </a>
+ Silverlight does not do the job
for the free world unless it normally comes with free replacement codecs.
-</p>
-<a name="index-Java-3"></a>
-<p>Java applets also run in the browser, and raise similar issues. In
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-Java-3">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Java applets also run in the browser, and raise similar issues. In
general, any sort of applet system poses this sort of problem. Having
a free execution environment for an applet only brings us far enough
to encounter the problem.
-</p>
-<p>A strong movement has developed that calls for web sites to
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ A strong movement has developed that calls for web sites to
communicate only through formats and protocols that are free (some say
“open”); that is to say, whose documentation is published and which
anyone is free to implement. With the presence of programs in web
@@ -132,8 +127,9 @@ not enough for the program to be written in a documented and
unencumbered language; that program must be free, too. “Only free
programs transmitted to the user” must become part of the criterion
for proper behavior by web sites.
-</p>
-<p>Silently loading and running nonfree programs is one among several
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Silently loading and running nonfree programs is one among several
issues raised by “web applications.” The term “web
application” was designed to disregard the fundamental
distinction between software delivered to users and software running
@@ -145,39 +141,52 @@ different ethical issues, even if they are so closely
integrated that
they arguably form parts of a single program. This article addresses
only the issue of the client-side software. We are addressing the
server issue separately.
-</p>
-<p>In practical terms, how can we deal with the problem of nonfree
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ In practical terms, how can we deal with the problem of nonfree
JavaScript programs in web sites? Here’s a plan of action.
-</p>
-<p>First, we need a practical criterion for nontrivial JavaScript
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ First, we need a practical criterion for nontrivial JavaScript
programs. Since “nontrivial” is a matter of degree, this is
a matter of designing a simple criterion that gives good results,
rather than determining the one correct answer.
-</p>
-<p>Our proposal is to consider a JavaScript program nontrivial if it
-makes an
-<a name="index-AJAX-request"></a>
-AJAX request, and consider it nontrivial if it defines
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Our proposal is to consider a JavaScript program nontrivial if it
+makes an
+ <a name="index-AJAX-request">
+ </a>
+ AJAX request, and consider it nontrivial if it defines
methods and either loads an external script or is loaded as one.
-</p>
-<p>At the end of this article we propose a convention by which a
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ At the end of this article we propose a convention by which a
nontrivial JavaScript program in a web page can state the URL where
its source code is located, and can state its license too, using
stylized comments.
-</p>
-<p>Finally, we need to change free browsers to support freedom for
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Finally, we need to change free browsers to support freedom for
users of pages with JavaScript. First of all, browsers should be able
to tell the user about nontrivial nonfree JavaScript programs, rather
-than running them. Perhaps
-<a name="index-NoScript"></a>
-NoScript could be adapted to do this.
-</p>
-<p>Browser users also need a convenient facility to specify JavaScript
-code to use <em>instead</em> of the JavaScript in a certain page.
+than running them. Perhaps
+ <a name="index-NoScript">
+ </a>
+ NoScript could be adapted to do this.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Browser users also need a convenient facility to specify JavaScript
+code to use
+ <em>
+ instead
+ </em>
+ of the JavaScript in a certain page.
(The specified code might be total replacement, or a modified version
-of the free JavaScript program in that page.)
-<a name="index-Greasemonkey"></a>
-Greasemonkey comes close
+of the free JavaScript program in that page.)
+ <a name="index-Greasemonkey">
+ </a>
+ Greasemonkey comes close
to being able to do this, but not quite, since it doesn’t guarantee to
modify the JavaScript code in a page before that program starts to
execute. Using a local proxy works, but is too inconvenient now to be
@@ -185,56 +194,94 @@ a real solution. We need to construct a solution that is
reliable and
convenient, as well as sites for sharing changes. The GNU Project
would like to recommend sites which are dedicated to free changes
only.
-</p>
-<p>These features will make it possible for a JavaScript program included
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ These features will make it possible for a JavaScript program included
in a web page to be free in a real and practical sense. JavaScript
will no longer be a particular obstacle to our freedom—no more than
-C and
-<a name="index-Java-4"></a>
-Java are now. We will be able to reject and even replace the nonfree
+C and
+ <a name="index-Java-4">
+ </a>
+ Java are now. We will be able to reject and even replace the nonfree
nontrivial JavaScript programs, just as we reject and replace nonfree
packages that are offered for installation in the usual way. Our
campaign for web sites to free their JavaScript can then
begin.
-</p>
-<p>Thank you to
-<a name="index-Lee_002c-Matt"></a>
-Matt Lee and
-<a name="index-Resig_002c-John"></a>
-John Resig for their help in defining our
-proposed criterion, and to
-<a name="index-Parunakian_002c-David"></a>
-David Parunakian and
-<a name="index-Rumith_002c-Jaffar"></a>
-Jaffar Rumith for
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Thank you to
+ <a name="index-Lee_002c-Matt">
+ </a>
+ Matt Lee and
+ <a name="index-Resig_002c-John">
+ </a>
+ John Resig for their help in defining our
+proposed criterion, and to
+ <a name="index-Parunakian_002c-David">
+ </a>
+ David Parunakian and
+ <a name="index-Rumith_002c-Jaffar">
+ </a>
+ Jaffar Rumith for
bringing this issue to my attention.
-</p>
-<a
name="Appendix_003a-A-Convention-for-Releasing-Free-JavaScript-Programs"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Appendix: A Convention for Releasing Free JavaScript
Programs </h3>
-<a name="index-GPL_002c-releasing-JavaScript-programs-under"></a>
-
-<p>For references to corresponding source code, we recommend
-</p>
-<table><tr><td> </td><td><pre class="smallexample">
+ </p>
+ <a name="Appendix_003a-A-Convention-for-Releasing-Free-JavaScript-Programs">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Appendix: A Convention for Releasing Free JavaScript Programs
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-GPL_002c-releasing-JavaScript-programs-under">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ For references to corresponding source code, we recommend
+ </p>
+ <table>
+ <tr>
+ <td>
+ </td>
+ <td>
+ <pre class="smallexample">
// @source:
-</pre></td></tr></table><p>followed by the URL.
-</p>
-<p>To indicate the license of the JavaScript code embedded in a page, we
+</pre>
+ </td>
+ </tr>
+ </table>
+ <p>
+ followed by the URL.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ To indicate the license of the JavaScript code embedded in a page, we
recommend putting the license notice between two notes of this form:
-</p>
-<table><tr><td> </td><td><pre class="smallexample">
+ </p>
+ <table>
+ <tr>
+ <td>
+ </td>
+ <td>
+ <pre class="smallexample">
@licstart The following is the entire license notice for the
JavaScript code in this page.
...
@licend The above is the entire license notice
for the JavaScript code in this page.
-</pre></td></tr></table><p>Of course, all of this should be contained in a
multiline comment.
-</p>
-<p>The GNU GPL, like many other free software licenses, requires distribution
of a copy of the license with both source and binary forms of the program.
However, the GNU GPL is long enough that including it in a page with a
JavaScript program can be inconvenient. You can remove that requirement, for
code that you have the copyright on, with a license notice like this:
-</p>
-<table><tr><td> </td><td><pre class="smallexample">
+</pre>
+ </td>
+ </tr>
+ </table>
+ <p>
+ Of course, all of this should be contained in a multiline comment.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The GNU GPL, like many other free software licenses, requires distribution
of a copy of the license with both source and binary forms of the program.
However, the GNU GPL is long enough that including it in a page with a
JavaScript program can be inconvenient. You can remove that requirement, for
code that you have the copyright on, with a license notice like this:
+ </p>
+ <table>
+ <tr>
+ <td>
+ </td>
+ <td>
+ <pre class="smallexample">
Copyright (C) YYYY Developer
The JavaScript code in this page is free software: you can
@@ -251,8 +298,15 @@ recommend putting the license notice between two notes of
this form:
section 4, provided you include this license notice and a URL
through which recipients can access the Corresponding Source.
-</pre></td></tr></table><a
name="index-GPL_002c-releasing-JavaScript-programs-under-1"></a>
-<a name="index-JavaScript-3"></a>
-<a name="index-traps_002c-JavaScript-1"></a>
-
-<hr size="2"></section></body></html>
+</pre>
+ </td>
+ </tr>
+ </table>
+ <a name="index-GPL_002c-releasing-JavaScript-programs-under-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-JavaScript-3">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-traps_002c-JavaScript-1">
+ </a>
+ <hr size="2"/>
+</section>
diff --git a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_36.html
b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_36.html
index 8eef084..48ecc9a 100644
--- a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_36.html
+++ b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_36.html
@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
-<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/loose.dtd";>
-<html><!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
+<!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
Free Software Foundation
@@ -19,74 +18,65 @@ ISBN 978-0-9831592-0-9
Cover design by Rob Myers.
Cover photograph by Peter Hinely.
- --><!-- Created on February 18, 2016 by texi2html 1.82
-texi2html was written by:
- Lionel Cons <address@hidden> (original author)
- Karl Berry <address@hidden>
- Olaf Bachmann <address@hidden>
- and many others.
-Maintained by: Many creative people.
-Send bugs and suggestions to <address@hidden>
---><head><title>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 36. The X Window System
Trap</title><meta name="description" content="This is the second edition of
Richard Stallman's collection of essays."><meta name="keywords" content="Free
Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 36. The X Window System Trap"><meta
name="resource-type" content="document"><meta name="distribution"
content="global"><meta name="Generator" content="texi2html 1.82"><meta
http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset= [...]
-<!--
-a.summary-letter {text-decoration: none}
-blockquote.smallquotation {font-size: smaller}
-pre.display {font-family: serif}
-pre.format {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-comment {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-preformatted {font-family: serif}
-pre.smalldisplay {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallexample {font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallformat {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smalllisp {font-size: smaller}
-span.roman {font-family:serif; font-weight:normal;}
-span.sansserif {font-family:sans-serif; font-weight:normal;}
-ul.toc {list-style: none}
--->
-</style><link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
href="../static/web-common/style.css"></head><body lang="en" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
text="#000000" link="#0000FF" vlink="#800080" alink="#FF0000" class="article">
+ -->
-<a name="X"></a>
-<header><div id="logo"><a href="/"><img src="../static/gnu.svg" height="100"
width="100"></a></div><h1 class="book-title">Free Software, Free Society, 2nd
ed.</h1></header><section id="main"><a name="The-X-Window-System-Trap"></a>
-<h1 class="chapter"> 36. The X Window System Trap </h1>
-
-<a name="index-traps_002c-X-Window-System"></a>
-<a name="index-X-Window-System-5"></a>
-<a name="index-developers_002c-to-copyleft-or-not-to-copyleft_003f"></a>
-<p>To copyleft or not to copyleft? That is one of the major
+<section id="main">
+ <a name="The-X-Window-System-Trap">
+ </a>
+ <h1 class="chapter">
+ 36. The X Window System Trap
+ </h1>
+ <a name="index-traps_002c-X-Window-System">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-X-Window-System-5">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-developers_002c-to-copyleft-or-not-to-copyleft_003f">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ To copyleft or not to copyleft? That is one of the major
controversies in the free software community. The idea of copyleft is
that we should fight fire with fire—that we should use copyright
to make sure our code stays free. The GNU General Public License (GNU
GPL) is one example of a copyleft license.
-</p>
-<p>Some free software developers prefer noncopyleft distribution.
-Noncopyleft licenses such as the
-<a name="index-XFree86-license"></a>
-XFree86 and
-<a
name="index-BSD-licenses-_0028see-also-both-_0060_0060BSD_002dstyle_0027_0027-and-GPL_0029-2"></a>
-BSD licenses are based on the idea
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Some free software developers prefer noncopyleft distribution.
+Noncopyleft licenses such as the
+ <a name="index-XFree86-license">
+ </a>
+ XFree86 and
+ <a
name="index-BSD-licenses-_0028see-also-both-_0060_0060BSD_002dstyle_0027_0027-and-GPL_0029-2">
+ </a>
+ BSD licenses are based on the idea
of never saying no to anyone—not even to someone who seeks to
use your work as the basis for restricting other people. Noncopyleft
licensing does nothing wrong, but it misses the opportunity to
actively protect our freedom to change and redistribute software. For
that, we need copyleft.
-</p>
-<a name="index-copylefted-software-_0028see-also-software_0029-3"></a>
-<a name="index-copyleft_002c-X-Consortium-opposition-to"></a>
-<a
name="index-X-Consortium-_0028see-also-Open-Group_002c-its-successor_0029-3"></a>
-<p>For many years, the X Consortium was the chief opponent of copyleft.
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-copylefted-software-_0028see-also-software_0029-3">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-copyleft_002c-X-Consortium-opposition-to">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-X-Consortium-_0028see-also-Open-Group_002c-its-successor_0029-3">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ For many years, the X Consortium was the chief opponent of copyleft.
It exerted both moral suasion and pressure to discourage free software
developers from copylefting their programs. It used moral suasion by
suggesting that it is not nice to say no. It used pressure through
its rule that copylefted software could not be in the X Distribution.
-</p>
-<p>Why did the X Consortium adopt this policy? It had to do with their
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Why did the X Consortium adopt this policy? It had to do with their
conception of success. The X Consortium defined success as
popularity—specifically, getting computer companies to use the X
Window System. This definition put the computer companies in the
driver’s seat: whatever they wanted, the X Consortium had to help
them get it.
-</p>
-<p>Computer companies normally distribute proprietary software. They
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Computer companies normally distribute proprietary software. They
wanted free software developers to donate their work for such use. If
they had asked for this directly, people would have laughed. But the
X Consortium, fronting for them, could present this request as an
@@ -94,47 +84,58 @@ unselfish one. “Join us in donating our work to proprietary
software
developers,” they said, suggesting that this is a noble form of
self-sacrifice. “Join us in achieving popularity,” they said,
suggesting that it was not even a sacrifice.
-</p>
-<p>But self-sacrifice is not the issue: tossing away the defense that
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ But self-sacrifice is not the issue: tossing away the defense that
copyleft provides, which protects the freedom of the whole community,
is sacrificing more than yourself. Those who granted the X
Consortium’s request entrusted the community’s future to the goodwill
of the X Consortium.
-</p>
-<a name="index-X11R6_002e4-1"></a>
-<p>This trust was misplaced. In its last year, the X Consortium made a
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-X11R6_002e4-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ This trust was misplaced. In its last year, the X Consortium made a
plan to restrict the forthcoming X11R6.4 release so that it would not
be free software. They decided to start saying no, not only to
proprietary software developers, but to our community as well.
-</p>
-<p>There is an irony here. If you said yes when the X Consortium asked
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ There is an irony here. If you said yes when the X Consortium asked
you not to use copyleft, you put the X Consortium in a position to
license and restrict its version of your program, along with the
code for the core of X.
-</p>
-<p>The X Consortium did not carry out this plan. Instead it closed down
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The X Consortium did not carry out this plan. Instead it closed down
and transferred X development to the Open Group, whose staff are now
carrying out a similar plan. To give them credit, when I asked them
to release X11R6.4 under the GNU GPL in parallel with their planned
restrictive license, they were willing to consider the idea. (They
-were firmly against staying with the old
-<a name="index-X11-licenses-3"></a>
-X11 distribution terms.)
+were firmly against staying with the old
+ <a name="index-X11-licenses-3">
+ </a>
+ X11 distribution terms.)
Before they said yes or no to this proposal, it had already failed for
-another reason: the
-<a name="index-XFree86-1"></a>
-XFree86 group followed the X Consortium’s old
+another reason: the
+ <a name="index-XFree86-1">
+ </a>
+ XFree86 group followed the X Consortium’s old
policy, and will not accept copylefted software.
-<a name="index-copylefted-software-_0028see-also-software_0029-4"></a>
-</p>
-<p>In September 1998, several months after X11R6.4 was released with
+ <a name="index-copylefted-software-_0028see-also-software_0029-4">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ In September 1998, several months after X11R6.4 was released with
nonfree distribution terms, the Open Group reversed its decision and
rereleased it under the same noncopyleft free software license that
was used for X11R6.3. Thus, the Open Group therefore eventually did
what was right, but that does not alter the general issue.
-<a name="index-X11R6_002e4-2"></a>
-</p>
-<p>Even if the X Consortium and the Open Group had never planned to
+ <a name="index-X11R6_002e4-2">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Even if the X Consortium and the Open Group had never planned to
restrict X, someone else could have done it. Noncopylefted software
is vulnerable from all directions; it lets anyone make a nonfree
version dominant, if he will invest sufficient resources to add
@@ -142,43 +143,61 @@ significantly important features using proprietary code.
Users who
choose software based on technical characteristics, rather than on
freedom, could easily be lured to the nonfree version for short-term
convenience.
-</p>
-<p>The X Consortium and Open Group can no longer exert moral suasion by
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The X Consortium and Open Group can no longer exert moral suasion by
saying that it is wrong to say no. This will make it easier to decide
to copyleft your X-related software.
-<a
name="index-X-Consortium-_0028see-also-Open-Group_002c-its-successor_0029-4"></a>
-<a name="index-copyleft_002c-X-Consortium-opposition-to-1"></a>
-</p>
-<p>When you work on the core of X, on programs such as the X server,
+ <a
name="index-X-Consortium-_0028see-also-Open-Group_002c-its-successor_0029-4">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-copyleft_002c-X-Consortium-opposition-to-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ When you work on the core of X, on programs such as the X server,
Xlib, and Xt, there is a practical reason not to use copyleft. The
-<a name="index-X_002eorg"></a>
-X.org group does an important job for the community in maintaining
+ <a name="index-X_002eorg">
+ </a>
+ X.org group does an important job for the community in maintaining
these programs, and the benefit of copylefting our changes would be
less than the harm done by a fork in development. So it is better to
work with them, and not copyleft our changes on these programs.
-Likewise for utilities such as
-<a name="index-xset"></a>
-<code>xset</code> and
-<a name="index-xrdb"></a>
-<code>xrdb</code>, which are close to the
+Likewise for utilities such as
+ <a name="index-xset">
+ </a>
+ <code>
+ xset
+ </code>
+ and
+ <a name="index-xrdb">
+ </a>
+ <code>
+ xrdb
+ </code>
+ , which are close to the
core of X and do not need major improvements. At least we know that
the X.org group has a firm commitment to developing these programs as
free software.
-</p>
-<p>The issue is different for programs outside the core of X:
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The issue is different for programs outside the core of X:
applications, window managers, and additional libraries and widgets.
There is no reason not to copyleft them, and we should copyleft them.
-</p>
-<p>In case anyone feels the pressure exerted by the criteria for
-inclusion in the X distributions, the
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Project-9"></a>
-GNU Project will undertake to
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ In case anyone feels the pressure exerted by the criteria for
+inclusion in the X distributions, the
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Project-9">
+ </a>
+ GNU Project will undertake to
publicize copylefted packages that work with X. If you would like to
copyleft something, and you worry that its omission from the X
distribution will impede its popularity, please ask us to help.
-</p>
-<a
name="index-call-to-action_002c-resist-illusory-temptations-of-proprietary-software"></a>
-<p>At the same time, it is better if we do not feel too much need for
+ </p>
+ <a
name="index-call-to-action_002c-resist-illusory-temptations-of-proprietary-software">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ At the same time, it is better if we do not feel too much need for
popularity. When a businessman tempts you with “more
popularity,” he may try to convince you that his use of your
program is crucial to its success. Don’t believe it! If your program
@@ -188,14 +207,21 @@ not. You can get an indescribable sense of joy and
freedom by
responding, “Take it or leave it—that’s no skin off my
back.” Often the businessman will turn around and accept the
program with copyleft, once you call the bluff.
-</p>
-<a name="index-call-to-action_002c-copyleft-your-software"></a>
-<p>Friends, free software developers, don’t repeat old mistakes! If we
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-copyleft-your-software">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Friends, free software developers, don’t repeat old mistakes! If we
do not copyleft our software, we put its future at the mercy of anyone
equipped with more resources than scruples. With copyleft, we can
defend freedom, not just for ourselves, but for our whole
community.
-<a name="index-developers_002c-to-copyleft-or-not-to-copyleft_003f-1"></a>
-<a name="index-X-Window-System-6"></a>
-<a name="index-traps_002c-X-Window-System-1"></a>
-</p><hr size="2"></section></body></html>
+ <a name="index-developers_002c-to-copyleft-or-not-to-copyleft_003f-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-X-Window-System-6">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-traps_002c-X-Window-System-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <hr size="2"/>
+</section>
diff --git a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_37.html
b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_37.html
index 6096b09..ad4b61a 100644
--- a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_37.html
+++ b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_37.html
@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
-<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/loose.dtd";>
-<html><!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
+<!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
Free Software Foundation
@@ -19,206 +18,247 @@ ISBN 978-0-9831592-0-9
Cover design by Rob Myers.
Cover photograph by Peter Hinely.
- --><!-- Created on February 18, 2016 by texi2html 1.82
-texi2html was written by:
- Lionel Cons <address@hidden> (original author)
- Karl Berry <address@hidden>
- Olaf Bachmann <address@hidden>
- and many others.
-Maintained by: Many creative people.
-Send bugs and suggestions to <address@hidden>
---><head><title>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 37. The Problem Is
Software Controlled by Its Developer</title><meta name="description"
content="This is the second edition of Richard Stallman's collection of
essays."><meta name="keywords" content="Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.:
37. The Problem Is Software Controlled by Its Developer"><meta
name="resource-type" content="document"><meta name="distribution"
content="global"><meta name="Generator" content="texi2html 1.82"><meta [...]
-<!--
-a.summary-letter {text-decoration: none}
-blockquote.smallquotation {font-size: smaller}
-pre.display {font-family: serif}
-pre.format {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-comment {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-preformatted {font-family: serif}
-pre.smalldisplay {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallexample {font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallformat {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smalllisp {font-size: smaller}
-span.roman {font-family:serif; font-weight:normal;}
-span.sansserif {font-family:sans-serif; font-weight:normal;}
-ul.toc {list-style: none}
--->
-</style><link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
href="../static/web-common/style.css"></head><body lang="en" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
text="#000000" link="#0000FF" vlink="#800080" alink="#FF0000" class="article">
+ -->
-<a name="Root-of-Problem"></a>
-<header><div id="logo"><a href="/"><img src="../static/gnu.svg" height="100"
width="100"></a></div><h1 class="book-title">Free Software, Free Society, 2nd
ed.</h1></header><section id="main"><a
name="The-Problem-Is-Software-Controlled-by-Its-Developer"></a>
-<h1 class="chapter"> 37. The Problem Is Software Controlled by Its Developer
</h1>
-
-<a name="index-Zittrain_002c-Jonathan"></a>
-<p>I fully agree with Jonathan Zittrain’s conclusion that we should not
+<section id="main">
+ <a name="The-Problem-Is-Software-Controlled-by-Its-Developer">
+ </a>
+ <h1 class="chapter">
+ 37. The Problem Is Software Controlled by Its Developer
+ </h1>
+ <a name="index-Zittrain_002c-Jonathan">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ I fully agree with Jonathan Zittrain’s conclusion that we should not
abandon general-purpose computers. Alas, I disagree completely with
the path that led him to it. He presents serious security problems as
an intolerable crisis, but I’m not convinced. Then he forecasts that
users will panic in response and stampede toward restricted computers
(which he calls “appliances”), but there is no sign of this happening.
-</p>
-<a name="index-zombie-machines"></a>
-<a name="index-phishing"></a>
-<p>Zombie machines are a problem, but not a catastrophe. Moreover, far
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-zombie-machines">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-phishing">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Zombie machines are a problem, but not a catastrophe. Moreover, far
from panicking, most users ignore the issue. Today, people are indeed
concerned about the danger of phishing (mail and web pages that
solicit personal information for fraud), but using a browsing-only
device instead of a general computer won’t protect you from that.
-</p>
-<a name="index-Apple_002c-iPhone-_0028see-also-cell-phones_0029"></a>
-<p>Meanwhile, Apple has reported that 25 percent of iPhones have been
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-Apple_002c-iPhone-_0028see-also-cell-phones_0029">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Meanwhile, Apple has reported that 25 percent of iPhones have been
unlocked. Surely at least as many users would have preferred an
unlocked iPhone but were afraid to try a forbidden recipe to obtain
it. This refutes the idea that users generally prefer that their
devices be locked.
-</p>
-<a name="index-RealPlayer-_0028see-also-DRM_0029-1"></a>
-<a name="index-Adobe-Flash"></a>
-<a name="index-proprietary-software_002c-spying-on-users-1"></a>
-<p>It is true that a general computer lets you run programs designed to
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-RealPlayer-_0028see-also-DRM_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Adobe-Flash">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-proprietary-software_002c-spying-on-users-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ It is true that a general computer lets you run programs designed to
spy on you, restrict you, or even let the developer attack you. Such
-programs include
-<a
name="index-KaZaA-_0028see-also-both-DRM-and-treacherous-computing_0029-1"></a>
-KaZaA, RealPlayer, Adobe Flash,
-<a
name="index-Windows-Media-Player-_0028see-also-both-DRM-and-treacherous-computing_0029-2"></a>
-Windows Media Player,
-Microsoft
-<a name="index-Windows-4"></a>
-Windows, and MacOS.
-<a name="index-Windows_002c-Vista-1"></a>
-<a
name="index-Vista_002c-Windows-_0028see-also-both-Windows-and-DRM_0029-1"></a>
-Windows Vista does all three of those
+programs include
+ <a
name="index-KaZaA-_0028see-also-both-DRM-and-treacherous-computing_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ KaZaA, RealPlayer, Adobe Flash,
+ <a
name="index-Windows-Media-Player-_0028see-also-both-DRM-and-treacherous-computing_0029-2">
+ </a>
+ Windows Media Player,
+Microsoft
+ <a name="index-Windows-4">
+ </a>
+ Windows, and MacOS.
+ <a name="index-Windows_002c-Vista-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Vista_002c-Windows-_0028see-also-both-Windows-and-DRM_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ Windows Vista does all three of those
things; it also lets Microsoft change the software without asking, or
command it to permanently cease normal functioning.
-</p>
-<p>But restricted computers are no help, because they present the
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ But restricted computers are no help, because they present the
same problem for the same reason.
-</p>
-<p>The iPhone is designed for remote attack by Apple. When Apple remotely
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The iPhone is designed for remote attack by Apple. When Apple remotely
destroys iPhones that users have unlocked to enable other uses, that
-is no better than when Microsoft remotely sabotages
-<a
name="index-Vista_002c-Windows-_0028see-also-both-Windows-and-DRM_0029-2"></a>
-Vista. The
-<a name="index-TiVo-_0028see-also-tivoization_0029"></a>
-<a name="index-tivoization-5"></a>
-TiVo is
+is no better than when Microsoft remotely sabotages
+ <a name="index-Vista_002c-Windows-_0028see-also-both-Windows-and-DRM_0029-2">
+ </a>
+ Vista. The
+ <a name="index-TiVo-_0028see-also-tivoization_0029">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-tivoization-5">
+ </a>
+ TiVo is
designed to enforce restrictions on access to the recordings you make,
-and reports what you watch.
-<a name="index-e_002dbooks-4"></a>
-E-book readers such as the
-<a name="index-Amazon-2"></a>
-Amazon
-<a name="index-Swindle-2"></a>
-“Swindle” are designed to stop you from sharing and lending your
+and reports what you watch.
+ <a name="index-e_002dbooks-4">
+ </a>
+ E-book readers such as the
+ <a name="index-Amazon-2">
+ </a>
+ Amazon
+ <a name="index-Swindle-2">
+ </a>
+ “Swindle” are designed to stop you from sharing and lending your
books. Features that artificially obstruct use of your data are known
-<a
name="index-DRM_002c-call-it-_0060_0060Digital-Restrictions-Management_0027_0027-5"></a>
-<a
name="index-_0060_0060Digital-Rights-Management_002c_0027_0027-avoid-use-of-term-_0028see-also-DRM_0029-1"></a>
-as Digital Restrictions Management (DRM); our protest campaign against
-DRM is hosted at
-<a name="index-Defective-by-Design-_0028see-also-DRM_0029-4"></a>
-<a href="http://defectivebydesign.org";>http://defectivebydesign.org</a>. (Our
adversaries call DRM
+ <a
name="index-DRM_002c-call-it-_0060_0060Digital-Restrictions-Management_0027_0027-5">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-_0060_0060Digital-Rights-Management_002c_0027_0027-avoid-use-of-term-_0028see-also-DRM_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ as Digital Restrictions Management (DRM); our protest campaign against
+DRM is hosted at
+ <a name="index-Defective-by-Design-_0028see-also-DRM_0029-4">
+ </a>
+ <a href="http://defectivebydesign.org";>
+ http://defectivebydesign.org
+ </a>
+ . (Our adversaries call DRM
“Digital Rights Management” based on their idea that restricting you
is their right. When you choose a term, you choose your side.)
-</p>
-<p>The nastiest of the common restricted devices are
-<a name="index-cell-phones-_0028see-also-both-OpenMoko-and-Apple_0029"></a>
-cell phones. They
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The nastiest of the common restricted devices are
+ <a name="index-cell-phones-_0028see-also-both-OpenMoko-and-Apple_0029">
+ </a>
+ cell phones. They
transmit signals for tracking your whereabouts even when switched
“off”; the only way to stop this is to take out all the
batteries. Many can also be turned on remotely, for listening,
-unbeknownst to you. (The
-<a name="index-FBI-1"></a>
-FBI is already taking advantage of this
-feature, and the
-<a name="index-Commerce-Department_002c-US"></a>
-US Commerce Department lists this danger in its
+unbeknownst to you. (The
+ <a name="index-FBI-1">
+ </a>
+ FBI is already taking advantage of this
+feature, and the
+ <a name="index-Commerce-Department_002c-US">
+ </a>
+ US Commerce Department lists this danger in its
Security Guide.) Cellular phone network companies regularly install
software in users phones, without asking, to impose new usage
restrictions.
-</p>
-<p>With a general computer you can escape by rejecting such programs. You
-don’t have to have KaZaA, RealPlayer, Adobe Flash,
-<a
name="index-Windows-Media-Player-_0028see-also-both-DRM-and-treacherous-computing_0029-3"></a>
-Windows Media
-Player, Microsoft Windows or
-<a name="index-MacOS-_0028see-also-DRM_0029"></a>
-MacOS on your computer (I don’t). By
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ With a general computer you can escape by rejecting such programs. You
+don’t have to have KaZaA, RealPlayer, Adobe Flash,
+ <a
name="index-Windows-Media-Player-_0028see-also-both-DRM-and-treacherous-computing_0029-3">
+ </a>
+ Windows Media
+Player, Microsoft Windows or
+ <a name="index-MacOS-_0028see-also-DRM_0029">
+ </a>
+ MacOS on your computer (I don’t). By
contrast, a restricted computer gives you no escape from the software
built into it.
-<a
name="index-KaZaA-_0028see-also-both-DRM-and-treacherous-computing_0029-2"></a>
-<a name="index-Adobe-Flash-1"></a>
-<a name="index-RealPlayer-_0028see-also-DRM_0029-2"></a>
-</p>
-<a name="index-development_002c-developer-control"></a>
-<p>The root of this problem, both in general PCs and restricted
+ <a
name="index-KaZaA-_0028see-also-both-DRM-and-treacherous-computing_0029-2">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Adobe-Flash-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-RealPlayer-_0028see-also-DRM_0029-2">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-development_002c-developer-control">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The root of this problem, both in general PCs and restricted
computers, is software controlled by its developer. The developer
(typically a corporation) controls what the program does, and prevents
everyone else from changing it. If the developer decides to put in
malicious features, even a master programmer cannot easily remove
them.
-</p>
-<a name="index-users_002c-benefit-to-4"></a>
-<a name="index-call-to-action_002c-insist-on-free-software"></a>
-<p>The remedy is to give the users more control, not less. We must insist
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-users_002c-benefit-to-4">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-insist-on-free-software">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The remedy is to give the users more control, not less. We must insist
on free/libre software, software that the users are free to change and
redistribute. Free/libre software develops under the control of its
users: if they don’t like its features, for whatever reason, they can
change them. If you’re not a programmer, you still get the benefit of
control by the users. A programmer can make the improvements you would
like, and publish the changed version. Then you can use it too.
-</p>
-<a name="index-malware"></a>
-<p>With free/libre software, no one has the power to make a malicious
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-malware">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ With free/libre software, no one has the power to make a malicious
feature stick. Since the source code is available to the users,
millions of programmers are in a position to spot and remove the
malicious feature and release an improved version; surely someone
will do it. Others can then compare the two versions
to verify independently which version treats users right. As a practical
fact, free software is generally free of designed-in malware.
-</p>
-<a name="index-call-to-action_002c-price-deception"></a>
-<p>Many people do acquire restricted devices, but not for motives of
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-price-deception">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Many people do acquire restricted devices, but not for motives of
security. Why do people choose them?
-</p>
-<p>Sometimes it is because the restricted devices are physically
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Sometimes it is because the restricted devices are physically
smaller. I edit text all day (literally) and I find the keyboard and
screen of a laptop well worth the size and weight. However, people who
use computers differently may prefer something that fits in a
pocket. In the past, these devices have typically been restricted, but
they weren’t chosen for that reason.
-</p>
-<p>Now they are becoming less restricted. In fact, the
-<a name="index-OpenMoko-_0028see-also-cell-phones_0029"></a>
-OpenMoko cell
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Now they are becoming less restricted. In fact, the
+ <a name="index-OpenMoko-_0028see-also-cell-phones_0029">
+ </a>
+ OpenMoko cell
phone features a main computer running entirely free/libre software,
including the GNU/Linux operating system normally used on PCs and
servers.
-</p>
-<a name="index-games_002c-price-deception-and"></a>
-<p>A major cause for the purchase of some restricted computers is
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-games_002c-price-deception-and">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ A major cause for the purchase of some restricted computers is
financial sleight of hand. Game consoles, and the iPhone, are sold for an
unsustainably low price, and the manufacturers subsequently charge when you use
them. Thus, game developers must pay the game console manufacturer to
distribute a game, and they pass this cost on to the
-user. Likewise,
-<a name="index-AT_0026T"></a>
-AT&T pays Apple when an iPhone is used as a
+user. Likewise,
+ <a name="index-AT_0026T">
+ </a>
+ AT&T pays Apple when an iPhone is used as a
telephone. The low up-front price misleads customers into thinking
they will save money.
-<a name="index-Apple_002c-iPhone-_0028see-also-cell-phones_0029-1"></a>
-</p>
-<p>If we are concerned about the spread of restricted computers, we
+ <a name="index-Apple_002c-iPhone-_0028see-also-cell-phones_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ If we are concerned about the spread of restricted computers, we
should tackle the issue of the price deception that sells them.
If we are concerned about malware, we should insist on free
software that gives the users control.
-<a name="index-call-to-action_002c-price-deception-1"></a>
-<a name="index-malware-1"></a>
-</p>
-<a name="Postnote"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Postnote </h3>
-
-<a name="index-development_002c-patents-2"></a>
-<p>Zittrain’s suggestion to reduce the statute of limitations
+ <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-price-deception-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-malware-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <a name="Postnote">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Postnote
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-development_002c-patents-2">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Zittrain’s suggestion to reduce the statute of limitations
on software patent lawsuits is a tiny step in the right direction, but
it is much easier to solve the whole problem. Software patents are an
unnecessary, artificial danger imposed on all software developers and
@@ -229,10 +269,18 @@ probably patented. (Avoiding them is not feasible; there
may be no
alternatives, or the alternatives may be patented too.) So the
developers of the program face hundreds of potential lawsuits from
parties unknown, and the users can be sued as well.
-</p>
-<p>The complete, simple solution is to eliminate patents from the field
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The complete, simple solution is to eliminate patents from the field
of software. Since the patent system is created by statute, eliminating
patents from software will be easy given sufficient political
-will. (See <a
href="http://www.endsoftpatents.org";>http://www.endsoftpatents.org</a>.)
-<a name="index-Zittrain_002c-Jonathan-1"></a>
-</p><hr size="2"></section></body></html>
+will. (See
+ <a href="http://www.endsoftpatents.org";>
+ http://www.endsoftpatents.org
+ </a>
+ .)
+ <a name="index-Zittrain_002c-Jonathan-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <hr size="2"/>
+</section>
diff --git a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_38.html
b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_38.html
index 9550237..175fc6e 100644
--- a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_38.html
+++ b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_38.html
@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
-<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/loose.dtd";>
-<html><!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
+<!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
Free Software Foundation
@@ -19,46 +18,29 @@ ISBN 978-0-9831592-0-9
Cover design by Rob Myers.
Cover photograph by Peter Hinely.
- --><!-- Created on February 18, 2016 by texi2html 1.82
-texi2html was written by:
- Lionel Cons <address@hidden> (original author)
- Karl Berry <address@hidden>
- Olaf Bachmann <address@hidden>
- and many others.
-Maintained by: Many creative people.
-Send bugs and suggestions to <address@hidden>
---><head><title>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 38. We Can Put an End to
Word Attachments</title><meta name="description" content="This is the second
edition of Richard Stallman's collection of essays."><meta name="keywords"
content="Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 38. We Can Put an End to Word
Attachments"><meta name="resource-type" content="document"><meta
name="distribution" content="global"><meta name="Generator" content="texi2html
1.82"><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" co [...]
-<!--
-a.summary-letter {text-decoration: none}
-blockquote.smallquotation {font-size: smaller}
-pre.display {font-family: serif}
-pre.format {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-comment {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-preformatted {font-family: serif}
-pre.smalldisplay {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallexample {font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallformat {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smalllisp {font-size: smaller}
-span.roman {font-family:serif; font-weight:normal;}
-span.sansserif {font-family:sans-serif; font-weight:normal;}
-ul.toc {list-style: none}
--->
-</style><link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
href="../static/web-common/style.css"></head><body lang="en" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
text="#000000" link="#0000FF" vlink="#800080" alink="#FF0000" class="article">
+ -->
-<a name="No-Word-Attachments"></a>
-<header><div id="logo"><a href="/"><img src="../static/gnu.svg" height="100"
width="100"></a></div><h1 class="book-title">Free Software, Free Society, 2nd
ed.</h1></header><section id="main"><a
name="We-Can-Put-an-End-to-Word-Attachments"></a>
-<h1 class="chapter"> 38. We Can Put an End to Word Attachments </h1>
-
-<a name="index-call-to-action_002c-put-an-end-to-Word-attachments"></a>
-<a name="index-Microsoft_002c-Word-_0028see-also-Word_0029"></a>
-<a name="index-Word_002c-attachments"></a>
-<p>Don’t you just hate receiving Word documents in email messages? Word
+<section id="main">
+ <a name="We-Can-Put-an-End-to-Word-Attachments">
+ </a>
+ <h1 class="chapter">
+ 38. We Can Put an End to Word Attachments
+ </h1>
+ <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-put-an-end-to-Word-attachments">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Microsoft_002c-Word-_0028see-also-Word_0029">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Word_002c-attachments">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Don’t you just hate receiving Word documents in email messages? Word
attachments are annoying, but, worse than that, they impede people from
switching to free software. Maybe we can stop this practice with a
simple collective effort. All we have to do is ask each person who
sends us a Word file to reconsider that way of doing things.
-</p>
-<p>Most computer users use Microsoft Word. That is unfortunate for them,
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Most computer users use Microsoft Word. That is unfortunate for them,
since Word is proprietary software, denying its users the freedom to
study, change, copy, and redistribute it. And because Microsoft
changes the Word file format with each release, its users are locked
@@ -66,16 +48,18 @@ into a system that compels them to buy each upgrade whether
they want
a change or not. They may even find, several years from now, that the
Word documents they are writing this year can no longer be read with
the version of Word they use then.
-</p>
-<p>But it hurts us, too, when they assume we use Word and send us (or
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ But it hurts us, too, when they assume we use Word and send us (or
demand that we send them) documents in Word format. Some people
publish or post documents in Word format. Some organizations will
only accept files in Word format: I heard from someone that he was
unable to apply for a job because resumes had to be Word files. Even
governments sometimes impose Word format on the public, which is truly
outrageous.
-</p>
-<p>For us users of free operating systems, receiving Word documents is an
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ For us users of free operating systems, receiving Word documents is an
inconvenience or an obstacle. But the worst impact of sending Word
format is on people who might switch to free systems: they hesitate
because they feel they must have Word available to read the Word files
@@ -84,16 +68,20 @@ interchange impedes the growth of our community and the
spread of
freedom. While we notice the occasional annoyance of receiving a Word
document, this steady and persistent harm to our community usually
doesn’t come to our attention. But it is happening all the time.
-</p>
-<a name="index-ASCII-1"></a>
-<p>Many GNU users who receive Word documents try to find ways to handle
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-ASCII-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Many GNU users who receive Word documents try to find ways to handle
them. You can manage to find the somewhat obfuscated ASCII text in
the file by skimming through it. Free software today can read most
Word documents, but not all—the format is secret and has not been
entirely decoded. Even worse, Microsoft can change it at any time.
-</p>
-<a name="index-Microsoft_002c-OOXML-format-_0028see-also-patents_0029-1"></a>
-<p>Worst of all, it has already done so. Microsoft Office 2007 uses by
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-Microsoft_002c-OOXML-format-_0028see-also-patents_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Worst of all, it has already done so. Microsoft Office 2007 uses by
default a format based on the patented OOXML format. (This is the one
that Microsoft got declared an “open standard” by
political manipulation and packing standards committees.) The actual
@@ -101,123 +89,231 @@ format is not entirely OOXML, and it is not entirely
documented.
Microsoft offers a gratis patent license for OOXML on terms which do
not allow free implementations. We are thus beginning to receive Word
files in a format that free programs are not even allowed to read.
-</p>
-<p>When you receive a Word file, if you think of that as an isolated
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ When you receive a Word file, if you think of that as an isolated
event, it is natural to try to cope by finding a way to read
it. Considered as an instance of a pernicious systematic practice, it
calls for a different approach. Managing to read the file is treating
a symptom of an epidemic disease; what we really want to do is stop
the disease from spreading. That means we must convince people not to
send or post Word documents.
-</p>
-<p>I therefore make a practice of responding to Word attachments with a
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ I therefore make a practice of responding to Word attachments with a
polite message explaining why the practice of sending Word files is a
bad thing, and asking the person to resend the material in a nonsecret
format. This is a lot less work than trying to read the somewhat
obfuscated ASCII text in the Word file. And I find that people
usually understand the issue, and many say they will not send Word
files to others any more.
-<a name="index-ASCII-2"></a>
-</p>
-<p>If we all do this, we will have a much larger effect. People who
+ <a name="index-ASCII-2">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ If we all do this, we will have a much larger effect. People who
disregard one polite request may change their practice when they
receive multiple polite requests from various people. We may be able
-to give <em>Don’t send Word format!</em> the status of
-<a name="index-netiquette"></a>
-netiquette,
+to give
+ <em>
+ Don’t send Word format!
+ </em>
+ the status of
+ <a name="index-netiquette">
+ </a>
+ netiquette,
if we start systematically raising the issue with everyone who sends
us Word files.
-</p>
-<p>To make this effort efficient, you will probably want to develop a
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ To make this effort efficient, you will probably want to develop a
canned reply that you can quickly send each time it is necessary.
I’ve included two examples: the version I have been using recently,
followed by a new version that teaches a Word user how to convert to
-other useful formats.
-</p>
-<ul><li>
-<blockquote class="smallquotation">
-<a name="index-Word_002c-converting-Word-documents-into-free-formats"></a>
-<a name="index-PDF-2"></a>
-<a name="index-HTML-2"></a>
-<p>You sent the attachment in Microsoft Word format, a secret
+other useful formats.
+ </p>
+ <ul>
+ <li>
+ <blockquote class="smallquotation">
+ <a name="index-Word_002c-converting-Word-documents-into-free-formats">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-PDF-2">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-HTML-2">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ You sent the attachment in Microsoft Word format, a secret
proprietary format, so I cannot read it. If you send me the plain
text, HTML, or PDF, then I could read it.
-</p>
-<p>Sending people documents in Word format has bad effects, because that
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Sending people documents in Word format has bad effects, because that
practice puts pressure on them to use Microsoft software. In effect,
you become a buttress of the Microsoft monopoly. This specific
problem is a major obstacle to the broader adoption of GNU/Linux.
Would you please reconsider the use of Word format for communication
with other people?
-</p>
-
-<p>You sent the attachment in Microsoft Word format, a secret
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ You sent the attachment in Microsoft Word format, a secret
proprietary format, so it is hard for me to read. If you send me
plain text, HTML, or PDF, then I will read it.
-</p>
-<p>Distributing documents in Word format is bad for you and for others.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Distributing documents in Word format is bad for you and for others.
You can’t be sure what they will look like if someone views them
with a different version of Word; they may not work at all.
-</p>
-<p>Receiving Word documents is bad for you because they can carry viruses (see
<a
href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macro_virus_(computing)">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macro_virus_(computing)</a>).
Sending Word documents is bad for you because a Word document normally
includes hidden information about the author, enabling those in the know to pry
into the author’s activities (maybe yours). Text that you think you deleted may
still be embarrassingly present. See <a href="http://news.bb [...]
-</p>
-<p>But above all, sending people Word documents puts pressure on them to
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Receiving Word documents is bad for you because they can carry viruses
(see
+ <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macro_virus_(computing)">
+ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macro_virus_(computing)
+ </a>
+ ). Sending Word documents is bad for you because a Word document normally
includes hidden information about the author, enabling those in the know to pry
into the author’s activities (maybe yours). Text that you think you deleted may
still be embarrassingly present. See
+ <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/3154479.stm";>
+ http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/3154479.stm
+ </a>
+ for more info.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ But above all, sending people Word documents puts pressure on them to
use Microsoft software and helps to deny them any other choice. In
effect, you become a buttress of the Microsoft monopoly. This
pressure is a major obstacle to the broader adoption of free software.
Would you please switch to a different way of sending files to other
people, instead of Word format?
-</p>
-<p>To convert the file to HTML using Word is simple. Open the
-document, click on <tt>File</tt>, then <tt>Save As</tt>, and in the <tt>Save
As Type</tt> strip
-box at the bottom of the box, choose <tt>HTML Document</tt> or <tt>Web
Page</tt>. Then
-choose <tt>Save</tt>. You can then attach the new HTML document instead of
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ To convert the file to HTML using Word is simple. Open the
+document, click on
+ <tt>
+ File
+ </tt>
+ , then
+ <tt>
+ Save As
+ </tt>
+ , and in the
+ <tt>
+ Save As Type
+ </tt>
+ strip
+box at the bottom of the box, choose
+ <tt>
+ HTML Document
+ </tt>
+ or
+ <tt>
+ Web Page
+ </tt>
+ . Then
+choose
+ <tt>
+ Save
+ </tt>
+ . You can then attach the new HTML document instead of
your Word document. Note that Word changes in inconsistent
ways—if you see slightly different menu item names, please try
them.
-</p>
-<p>To convert to plain text is almost the same—instead of <tt>HTML
-Document</tt>, choose <tt>Text Only</tt> or <tt>Text Document</tt> as the
<tt>Save As
-Type</tt>.
-<a name="index-HTML-3"></a>
-</p>
-<p>Your computer may also have a program to convert to PDF format.
-Select <tt>File</tt>, then <tt>Print</tt>. Scroll through available printers
and select
-the PDF converter. Click on the <tt>Print</tt> button and enter a name for the
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ To convert to plain text is almost the same—instead of
+ <tt>
+ HTML
+Document
+ </tt>
+ , choose
+ <tt>
+ Text Only
+ </tt>
+ or
+ <tt>
+ Text Document
+ </tt>
+ as the
+ <tt>
+ Save As
+Type
+ </tt>
+ .
+ <a name="index-HTML-3">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Your computer may also have a program to convert to PDF format.
+Select
+ <tt>
+ File
+ </tt>
+ , then
+ <tt>
+ Print
+ </tt>
+ . Scroll through available printers and select
+the PDF converter. Click on the
+ <tt>
+ Print
+ </tt>
+ button and enter a name for the
PDF file when requested.
-<a name="index-PDF-3"></a>
-</p>
-<p>See <a
href="http://gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html";>http://gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html</a>
for more
+ <a name="index-PDF-3">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ See
+ <a href="http://gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html";>
+ http://gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
+ </a>
+ for more
about this issue.
-</p></blockquote>
-</li></ul><p>You can use these replies verbatim if you like, or you can
personalize
+ </p>
+ </blockquote>
+ </li>
+ </ul>
+ <p>
+ You can use these replies verbatim if you like, or you can personalize
them or write your own. By all means construct a reply that fits your
ideas and your personality—if the replies are personal and not
all alike, that will make the campaign more effective.
-</p>
-<p>These replies are meant for individuals who send Word files. When you
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ These replies are meant for individuals who send Word files. When you
encounter an organization that imposes use of Word format, that calls
for a different sort of reply; there you can raise issues of fairness
that would not apply to an individual’s actions.
-</p>
-<p>Some recruiters ask for resumes in Word format. Ludicrously, some
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Some recruiters ask for resumes in Word format. Ludicrously, some
recruiters do this even when looking for someone for a free software
job. (Anyone using those recruiters for free software jobs is not
likely to get a competent employee.) To help change this practice,
-you can put a link to <a
href="http://gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html";>http://gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html</a>
into your resume, next to links to
+you can put a link to
+ <a href="http://gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html";>
+ http://gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
+ </a>
+ into your resume, next to links to
other formats of the resume. Anyone hunting for a Word version of the
resume will probably read the page.
-</p>
-<p>This essay talks about Word attachments, since they are by far the most
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ This essay talks about Word attachments, since they are by far the most
common case. However, the same issues apply with other proprietary
-formats, such as
-<a name="index-PowerPoint-_0028see-also-Word_0029"></a>
-PowerPoint and Excel. Please feel free to adapt the
+formats, such as
+ <a name="index-PowerPoint-_0028see-also-Word_0029">
+ </a>
+ PowerPoint and Excel. Please feel free to adapt the
replies to cover those as well.
-<a name="index-Word_002c-converting-Word-documents-into-free-formats-1"></a>
-</p>
-<p>With our numbers, simply by asking, we can make a difference.
-<a name="index-call-to-action_002c-put-an-end-to-Word-attachments-1"></a>
-<a name="index-Microsoft_002c-Word-_0028see-also-Word_0029-1"></a>
-<a name="index-Word_002c-attachments-1"></a>
-</p><hr size="2"></section></body></html>
+ <a name="index-Word_002c-converting-Word-documents-into-free-formats-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ With our numbers, simply by asking, we can make a difference.
+ <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-put-an-end-to-Word-attachments-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Microsoft_002c-Word-_0028see-also-Word_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Word_002c-attachments-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <hr size="2"/>
+</section>
diff --git a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_39.html
b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_39.html
index 027fde4..583040c 100644
--- a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_39.html
+++ b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_39.html
@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
-<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/loose.dtd";>
-<html><!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
+<!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
Free Software Foundation
@@ -19,57 +18,42 @@ ISBN 978-0-9831592-0-9
Cover design by Rob Myers.
Cover photograph by Peter Hinely.
- --><!-- Created on February 18, 2016 by texi2html 1.82
-texi2html was written by:
- Lionel Cons <address@hidden> (original author)
- Karl Berry <address@hidden>
- Olaf Bachmann <address@hidden>
- and many others.
-Maintained by: Many creative people.
-Send bugs and suggestions to <address@hidden>
---><head><title>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 39. Thank You, Larry
McVoy</title><meta name="description" content="This is the second edition of
Richard Stallman's collection of essays."><meta name="keywords" content="Free
Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 39. Thank You, Larry McVoy"><meta
name="resource-type" content="document"><meta name="distribution"
content="global"><meta name="Generator" content="texi2html 1.82"><meta
http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf- [...]
-<!--
-a.summary-letter {text-decoration: none}
-blockquote.smallquotation {font-size: smaller}
-pre.display {font-family: serif}
-pre.format {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-comment {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-preformatted {font-family: serif}
-pre.smalldisplay {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallexample {font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallformat {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smalllisp {font-size: smaller}
-span.roman {font-family:serif; font-weight:normal;}
-span.sansserif {font-family:sans-serif; font-weight:normal;}
-ul.toc {list-style: none}
--->
-</style><link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
href="../static/web-common/style.css"></head><body lang="en" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
text="#000000" link="#0000FF" vlink="#800080" alink="#FF0000" class="article">
+ -->
-<a name="McVoy"></a>
-<header><div id="logo"><a href="/"><img src="../static/gnu.svg" height="100"
width="100"></a></div><h1 class="book-title">Free Software, Free Society, 2nd
ed.</h1></header><section id="main"><a name="Thank-You_002c-Larry-McVoy"></a>
-<h1 class="chapter"> 39. Thank You, Larry McVoy </h1>
-
-<a name="index-McVoy_002c-Larry"></a>
-<a name="index-nonfree-software_002c-danger-of"></a>
-<p>For the first time in my life, I want to thank Larry McVoy. He
+<section id="main">
+ <a name="Thank-You_002c-Larry-McVoy">
+ </a>
+ <h1 class="chapter">
+ 39. Thank You, Larry McVoy
+ </h1>
+ <a name="index-McVoy_002c-Larry">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-nonfree-software_002c-danger-of">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ For the first time in my life, I want to thank Larry McVoy. He
recently eliminated a major weakness of the free software community,
by announcing the end of his campaign to entice free software projects
to use and promote his nonfree software. Soon, Linux development
will no longer use this program, and no longer spread the message that
nonfree software is a good thing if it’s convenient.
-</p>
-<p>My gratitude is limited, since it was McVoy that created the problem
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ My gratitude is limited, since it was McVoy that created the problem
in the first place. But I still appreciate his decision to clear it
up.
-</p>
-<a name="index-BitKeeper"></a>
-<p>There are thousands of nonfree programs, and most merit no special
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-BitKeeper">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ There are thousands of nonfree programs, and most merit no special
attention, other than developing a free replacement. What made this
program, BitKeeper, infamous and dangerous was its marketing approach:
inviting high-profile free software projects to use it, so as to
attract other paying users.
-</p>
-<p>McVoy made the program available gratis to free software developers.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ McVoy made the program available gratis to free software developers.
This did not mean it was free software for them: they were privileged
not to part with their money, but they still had to part with their
freedom. They gave up the fundamental freedoms that define free
@@ -77,37 +61,44 @@ software: freedom to run the program as you wish for any
purpose,
freedom to study and change the source code as you wish, freedom to
make and redistribute copies, and freedom to publish modified
versions.
-</p>
-<p>The free software movement has said, “Think of ‘free speech,’ not
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The free software movement has said, “Think of ‘free speech,’ not
‘free beer’” since 1990. McVoy said the opposite; he invited
developers to focus on the lack of monetary price, instead of on
freedom. A free software activist would dismiss this suggestion, but
those in our community who value technical advantage above freedom and
community were susceptible to it.
-</p>
-<a name="index-Linux-kernel-5"></a>
-<a name="index-kernel_002c-Linux-5"></a>
-<p>McVoy’s great triumph was the adoption of this program for Linux
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-Linux-kernel-5">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-kernel_002c-Linux-5">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ McVoy’s great triumph was the adoption of this program for Linux
development. No free software project is more visible than Linux. It
is the kernel of the GNU/Linux operating system, an essential
component, and users often mistake it for the entire system. As McVoy
surely planned, the use of his program in Linux development was
powerful publicity for it.
-</p>
-<p>It was also, whether intentionally or not, a powerful political PR
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ It was also, whether intentionally or not, a powerful political PR
campaign, telling the free software community that freedom-denying
software is acceptable as long as it’s convenient. If we had taken
that attitude towards Unix in 1984, where would we be today? Nowhere.
If we had accepted using Unix, instead of setting out to replace it,
nothing like the GNU/Linux system would exist.
-</p>
-<p>Of course, the Linux developers had practical reasons for what they
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Of course, the Linux developers had practical reasons for what they
did. I won’t argue with those reasons; they surely know what’s
convenient for them. But they did not count, or did not value, how
this would affect their freedom—or the rest of the community’s
efforts.
-</p>
-<p>A free kernel, even a whole free operating system, is not sufficient
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ A free kernel, even a whole free operating system, is not sufficient
to use your computer in freedom; we need free software for everything
else, too. Free applications, free drivers, free BIOS: some of those
projects face large obstacles—the need to reverse engineer
@@ -116,38 +107,48 @@ work around or face down patent threats, or to compete
with a network
effect. Success will require firmness and determination. A better
kernel is desirable, to be sure, but not at the expense of weakening
the impetus to liberate the rest of the software world.
-<a name="index-Linux-kernel-6"></a>
-<a name="index-kernel_002c-Linux-6"></a>
-</p>
-<p>When the use of his program became controversial, McVoy responded with
+ <a name="index-Linux-kernel-6">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-kernel_002c-Linux-6">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ When the use of his program became controversial, McVoy responded with
distraction. For instance, he promised to release it as free software
if the company went out of business. Alas, that does no good as long
as the company remains in business. Linux developers responded by
saying, “We’ll switch to a free program when you develop a
better one.” This was an indirect way of saying, “We made
the mess, but we won’t clean it up.”
-</p>
-<p>Fortunately, not everyone in Linux development considered a nonfree
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Fortunately, not everyone in Linux development considered a nonfree
program acceptable, and there was continuing pressure for a free
-alternative. Finally
-<a name="index-Tridgell_002c-Andrew"></a>
-Andrew Tridgell developed an interoperating free
+alternative. Finally
+ <a name="index-Tridgell_002c-Andrew">
+ </a>
+ Andrew Tridgell developed an interoperating free
program, so Linux developers would no longer need to use a nonfree
program.
-</p>
-<p>McVoy first blustered and threatened, but ultimately chose to go home
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ McVoy first blustered and threatened, but ultimately chose to go home
and take his ball with him: he withdrew permission for gratis use by
free software projects, and Linux developers will move to other
software. The program they no longer use will remain unethical as
long as it is nonfree, but they will no longer promote it, nor by
using it teach others to give freedom low priority. We can begin to
forget about that program.
-</p>
-<a name="index-call-to-action_002c-beware-of-nonfree-programs"></a>
-<p>We should not forget the lesson we have learned from it: Nonfree
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-beware-of-nonfree-programs">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ We should not forget the lesson we have learned from it: Nonfree
programs are dangerous to you and to your community. Don’t let them
get a place in your life.
-<a name="index-McVoy_002c-Larry-1"></a>
-<a name="index-nonfree-software_002c-danger-of-1"></a>
-</p>
-</section></body></html>
+ <a name="index-McVoy_002c-Larry-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-nonfree-software_002c-danger-of-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+</section>
diff --git a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_4.html
b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_4.html
index 7a661ce..972c355 100644
--- a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_4.html
+++ b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_4.html
@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
-<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/loose.dtd";>
-<html><!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
+<!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
Free Software Foundation
@@ -19,94 +18,105 @@ ISBN 978-0-9831592-0-9
Cover design by Rob Myers.
Cover photograph by Peter Hinely.
- --><!-- Created on February 18, 2016 by texi2html 1.82
-texi2html was written by:
- Lionel Cons <address@hidden> (original author)
- Karl Berry <address@hidden>
- Olaf Bachmann <address@hidden>
- and many others.
-Maintained by: Many creative people.
-Send bugs and suggestions to <address@hidden>
---><head><title>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 4. The GNU
Manifesto</title><meta name="description" content="This is the second edition
of Richard Stallman's collection of essays."><meta name="keywords"
content="Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 4. The GNU Manifesto"><meta
name="resource-type" content="document"><meta name="distribution"
content="global"><meta name="Generator" content="texi2html 1.82"><meta
http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><style ty [...]
-<!--
-a.summary-letter {text-decoration: none}
-blockquote.smallquotation {font-size: smaller}
-pre.display {font-family: serif}
-pre.format {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-comment {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-preformatted {font-family: serif}
-pre.smalldisplay {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallexample {font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallformat {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smalllisp {font-size: smaller}
-span.roman {font-family:serif; font-weight:normal;}
-span.sansserif {font-family:sans-serif; font-weight:normal;}
-ul.toc {list-style: none}
--->
-</style><link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
href="../static/web-common/style.css"></head><body lang="en" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
text="#000000" link="#0000FF" vlink="#800080" alink="#FF0000" class="article">
+ -->
-<a name="Manifesto"></a>
-<header><div id="logo"><a href="/"><img src="../static/gnu.svg" height="100"
width="100"></a></div><h1 class="book-title">Free Software, Free Society, 2nd
ed.</h1></header><section id="main"><a name="The-GNU-Manifesto"></a>
-<h1 class="chapter"> 4. The GNU Manifesto </h1>
-
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-_0060_0060GNU-Manifesto_0027_0027"></a>
-<a name="index-_0060_0060GNU-Manifesto_0027_0027"></a>
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Project-2"></a>
-
-<blockquote class="smallquotation"><p>The GNU Manifesto was written by Richard
Stallman at the beginning of
+<section id="main">
+ <a name="The-GNU-Manifesto">
+ </a>
+ <h1 class="chapter">
+ 4. The GNU Manifesto
+ </h1>
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-_0060_0060GNU-Manifesto_0027_0027">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-_0060_0060GNU-Manifesto_0027_0027">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Project-2">
+ </a>
+ <blockquote class="smallquotation">
+ <p>
+ The GNU Manifesto was written by Richard Stallman at the beginning of
the GNU Project, to ask for participation and support. For the first
few years, it was updated in minor ways to account for developments,
but now it seems best to leave it unchanged as most people have seen
-it.<br></p>
-<p>Since that time, we have learned about certain common misunderstandings
+it.
+ <br/>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Since that time, we have learned about certain common misunderstandings
that different wording could help avoid. Footnotes added since 1993 help
-clarify these points.<br></p>
-<p>For up-to-date information about the available GNU software, please
+clarify these points.
+ <br/>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ For up-to-date information about the available GNU software, please
see the information available on our web server, in particular our
-list of software. For how to contribute, see <a
href="http://gnu.org/help";>http://gnu.org/help</a>.
-</p></blockquote>
-
-<a name="What_0027s-GNU_003f-Gnu_0027s-Not-Unix_0021"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> What’s GNU? Gnu’s Not Unix! </h3>
-
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-software-_0028see-also-software_0029-1"></a>
-<a name="index-Unix-compatibility_002c-announcement-of-1"></a>
-<p>GNU, which stands for Gnu’s Not Unix, is the name for the complete
+list of software. For how to contribute, see
+ <a href="http://gnu.org/help";>
+ http://gnu.org/help
+ </a>
+ .
+ </p>
+ </blockquote>
+ <a name="What_0027s-GNU_003f-Gnu_0027s-Not-Unix_0021">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ What’s GNU? Gnu’s Not Unix!
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-software-_0028see-also-software_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Unix-compatibility_002c-announcement-of-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ GNU, which stands for Gnu’s Not Unix, is the name for the complete
Unix-compatible software system which I am writing so that I can give
-it away free to everyone who can use it.<a name="DOCF12"
href="#FOOT12">(12)</a> Several other volunteers are helping me. Contributions
+it away free to everyone who can use it.
+ <a href="#FOOT12" name="DOCF12">
+ (12)
+ </a>
+ Several other volunteers are helping me. Contributions
of time, money, programs and equipment are greatly needed.
-</p>
-
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-operating-system-parts-4"></a>
-<p> So far we have an
-<a name="index-Emacs_002c-GNU-4"></a>
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Emacs-4"></a>
-Emacs text editor with Lisp for writing editor
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-operating-system-parts-4">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ So far we have an
+ <a name="index-Emacs_002c-GNU-4">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Emacs-4">
+ </a>
+ Emacs text editor with Lisp for writing editor
commands, a source level debugger, a
-<a name="index-yacc-1"></a>
-yacc-compatible parser generator,
+ <a name="index-yacc-1">
+ </a>
+ yacc-compatible parser generator,
a linker, and around 35 utilities. A shell (command interpreter) is
nearly completed. A new portable optimizing C compiler has compiled
itself and may be released this year. An initial kernel exists but
many more features are needed to emulate Unix. When the kernel and
compiler are finished, it will be possible to distribute a GNU system
suitable for program development. We will use
-<a name="index-TeX-1"></a>
-TeX as our text
+ <a name="index-TeX-1">
+ </a>
+ TeX as our text
formatter, but an
-<a name="index-nroff"></a>
-nroff is being worked on. We will use the free,
+ <a name="index-nroff">
+ </a>
+ nroff is being worked on. We will use the free,
portable X window system as well. After this we will add a portable
-<a name="index-Common-Lisp"></a>
-<a name="index-Lisp_002c-Common"></a>
-<a name="index-Empire-game-1"></a>
-<a name="index-games_002c-Empire-1"></a>
-Common Lisp, an Empire game, a spreadsheet, and hundreds of other
+ <a name="index-Common-Lisp">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Lisp_002c-Common">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Empire-game-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-games_002c-Empire-1">
+ </a>
+ Common Lisp, an Empire game, a spreadsheet, and hundreds of other
things, plus online documentation. We hope to supply, eventually,
everything useful that normally comes with a Unix system, and more.
-</p>
-
-<p> GNU will be able to run Unix programs, but will not be identical to
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ GNU will be able to run Unix programs, but will not be identical to
Unix. We will make all improvements that are convenient, based on our
experience with other operating systems. In particular, we plan to
have longer file names, file version numbers, a crashproof file system,
@@ -115,80 +125,116 @@ perhaps eventually a Lisp-based window system through
which several
Lisp programs and ordinary Unix programs can share a screen. Both C
and Lisp will be available as system programming languages. We will
try to support
-<a name="index-UUCP-1"></a>
-UUCP,
-<a name="index-MIT_002c-Chaosnet-2"></a>
-MIT Chaosnet, and Internet protocols for
+ <a name="index-UUCP-1">
+ </a>
+ UUCP,
+ <a name="index-MIT_002c-Chaosnet-2">
+ </a>
+ MIT Chaosnet, and Internet protocols for
communication.
-</p>
-<p> GNU is aimed initially at machines in the
-<a name="index-68000_002dclass-hardware-2"></a>
-68000/16000 class with
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ GNU is aimed initially at machines in the
+ <a name="index-68000_002dclass-hardware-2">
+ </a>
+ 68000/16000 class with
virtual memory, because they are the easiest machines to make it run
on. The extra effort to make it run on smaller machines will be left
to someone who wants to use it on them.
-</p>
-<p> To avoid horrible confusion, please pronounce the <em>g</em>
-in the word “GNU” when it is the name of this project.
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-software-_0028see-also-software_0029-2"></a>
-</p>
-<a name="Why-I-Must-Write-GNU"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Why I Must Write GNU </h3>
-
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-motivation-to-write"></a>
-<p> I consider that the
-<a name="index-Golden-Rule-1"></a>
-Golden Rule requires that if I like a program I
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ To avoid horrible confusion, please pronounce the
+ <em>
+ g
+ </em>
+ in the word “GNU” when it is the name of this project.
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-software-_0028see-also-software_0029-2">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <a name="Why-I-Must-Write-GNU">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Why I Must Write GNU
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-motivation-to-write">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ I consider that the
+ <a name="index-Golden-Rule-1">
+ </a>
+ Golden Rule requires that if I like a program I
must share it with other people who like it. Software sellers want to
divide the users and conquer them, making each user agree not to share
with others. I refuse to break solidarity with other users in this
way. I cannot in good conscience sign a
-<a name="index-nondisclosure-agreements-4"></a>
-nondisclosure agreement or a
+ <a name="index-nondisclosure-agreements-4">
+ </a>
+ nondisclosure agreement or a
software license agreement. For years I worked within the
-<a
name="index-AI-_0028Artificial-Intelligence_0029-Lab_002c-MIT-_0028see-also-MIT_0029-1"></a>
-Artificial
+ <a
name="index-AI-_0028Artificial-Intelligence_0029-Lab_002c-MIT-_0028see-also-MIT_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ Artificial
Intelligence Lab to resist such tendencies and other inhospitalities,
but eventually they had gone too far: I could not remain in an
institution where such things are done for me against my will.
-</p>
-<p> So that I can continue to use computers without dishonor, I have
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ So that I can continue to use computers without dishonor, I have
decided to put together a sufficient body of free software so that I
will be able to get along without any software that is not free. I
have resigned from the
-<a name="index-MIT_002c-AI-_0028Artificial-Intelligence_0029-Lab-3"></a>
-AI Lab to deny MIT any legal excuse to prevent
-me from giving GNU away.<a name="DOCF13" href="#FOOT13">(13)</a>) for more
+ <a name="index-MIT_002c-AI-_0028Artificial-Intelligence_0029-Lab-3">
+ </a>
+ AI Lab to deny MIT any legal excuse to prevent
+me from giving GNU away.
+ <a href="#FOOT13" name="DOCF13">
+ (13)
+ </a>
+ ) for more
explanation.
-
-</p>
-<a name="Why-GNU-Will-Be-Compatible-with-Unix"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Why GNU Will Be Compatible with Unix </h3>
-
-<a name="index-Unix-compatibility_002c-reason-for-1"></a>
-<p> Unix is not my ideal system, but it is not too bad. The essential
+ </p>
+ <a name="Why-GNU-Will-Be-Compatible-with-Unix">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Why GNU Will Be Compatible with Unix
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-Unix-compatibility_002c-reason-for-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Unix is not my ideal system, but it is not too bad. The essential
features of Unix seem to be good ones, and I think I can fill in what
Unix lacks without spoiling them. And a system compatible with Unix
would be convenient for many other people to adopt.
-</p>
-<a name="How-GNU-Will-Be-Available"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> How GNU Will Be Available </h3>
-
-<a name="index-public-domain-software-_0028see-also-software_0029-1"></a>
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-programs-_0028see-also-software_0029"></a>
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-software-_0028see-also-software_0029-3"></a>
-<p> GNU is not in the public domain. Everyone will be permitted to
+ </p>
+ <a name="How-GNU-Will-Be-Available">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ How GNU Will Be Available
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-public-domain-software-_0028see-also-software_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-programs-_0028see-also-software_0029">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-software-_0028see-also-software_0029-3">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ GNU is not in the public domain. Everyone will be permitted to
modify and redistribute GNU, but no distributor will be allowed to
restrict its further redistribution. That is to say,
proprietary modifications will not be allowed. I want to make sure that all
versions of GNU remain free.
-</p>
-<a name="Why-Many-Other-Programmers-Want-to-Help"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Why Many Other Programmers Want to Help </h3>
-
-<a name="index-programmers_002c-incentive-for"></a>
-<a name="index-programmers_002c-psychosocial-harm-to"></a>
-<p> I have found many other programmers who are excited about GNU and
+ </p>
+ <a name="Why-Many-Other-Programmers-Want-to-Help">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Why Many Other Programmers Want to Help
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-programmers_002c-incentive-for">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-programmers_002c-psychosocial-harm-to">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ I have found many other programmers who are excited about GNU and
want to help.
Many programmers are unhappy about the commercialization of system
software. It may enable them to make more money, but it requires them
@@ -201,33 +247,44 @@ law. Naturally, many decide that friendship is more
important. But
those who believe in law often do not feel at ease with either choice.
They become cynical and think that programming is just a way of making
money.
-</p>
-<p> By working on and using GNU rather than proprietary programs, we can
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ By working on and using GNU rather than proprietary programs, we can
be hospitable to everyone and obey the law. In addition, GNU serves as
an example to inspire and a banner to rally others to join us in
sharing. This can give us a feeling of harmony which is impossible if
we use software that is not free. For about half the programmers I
talk to, this is an important happiness that money cannot replace.
-</p>
-<a name="How-You-Can-Contribute"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> How You Can Contribute </h3>
-
-<a name="index-call-to-action_002c-contribute-to-GNU-1"></a>
-<a name="index-call-to-action_002c-donate"></a>
-
-<p>I am asking computer manufacturers for donations of machines and
+ </p>
+ <a name="How-You-Can-Contribute">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ How You Can Contribute
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-contribute-to-GNU-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-donate">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ I am asking computer manufacturers for donations of machines and
money. I’m asking individuals for donations of programs and
-work.<a name="DOCF14" href="#FOOT14">(14)</a>
-</p>
-<p> One consequence you can expect if you donate machines is that GNU
+work.
+ <a href="#FOOT14" name="DOCF14">
+ (14)
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ One consequence you can expect if you donate machines is that GNU
will run on them at an early date. The machines should be complete,
ready to use systems, approved for use in a residential area, and not
in need of sophisticated cooling or power.
-</p>
-<p> I have found very many programmers eager to contribute part-time
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ I have found very many programmers eager to contribute part-time
work for GNU.
-<a name="index-Unix-compatibility_002c-ease-of-contribution-because-of-1"></a>
-For most projects, such part-time distributed work would
+ <a name="index-Unix-compatibility_002c-ease-of-contribution-because-of-1">
+ </a>
+ For most projects, such part-time distributed work would
be very hard to coordinate; the independently written parts would not
work together. But for the particular task of replacing Unix, this
problem is absent. A complete Unix system contains hundreds of utility
@@ -239,47 +296,64 @@ utilities will work right when put together. Even
allowing for Murphy
to create a few unexpected problems, assembling these components will
be a feasible task. (The kernel will require closer communication and
will be worked on by a small, tight group.)
-</p>
-<p> If I get donations of money, I may be able to hire a few people full
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ If I get donations of money, I may be able to hire a few people full
or part time. The salary won’t be high by programmers’ standards, but
I’m looking for people for whom building community spirit is as
important as making money. I view this as a way of enabling dedicated
people to devote their full energies to working on GNU by sparing them
the need to make a living in another way.
-<a name="index-call-to-action_002c-donate-1"></a>
-<a name="index-call-to-action_002c-contribute-to-GNU-2"></a>
-</p>
-<a name="Why-All-Computer-Users-Will-Benefit"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Why All Computer Users Will Benefit </h3>
-
-<a name="index-users_002c-benefit-to"></a>
-<p> Once GNU is written, everyone will be able to obtain good system
-software free, just like air.<a name="DOCF15" href="#FOOT15">(15)</a>
-</p>
-<p> This means much more than just saving everyone the price of a Unix
+ <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-donate-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-contribute-to-GNU-2">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <a name="Why-All-Computer-Users-Will-Benefit">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Why All Computer Users Will Benefit
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-users_002c-benefit-to">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Once GNU is written, everyone will be able to obtain good system
+software free, just like air.
+ <a href="#FOOT15" name="DOCF15">
+ (15)
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ This means much more than just saving everyone the price of a Unix
license. It means that much wasteful duplication of system programming
effort will be avoided. This effort can go instead into advancing the
state of the art.
-</p>
-<p> Complete system sources will be available to everyone. As a result,
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Complete system sources will be available to everyone. As a result,
a user who needs changes in the system will always be free to make them
himself, or hire any available programmer or company to make them for
him. Users will no longer be at the mercy of one programmer or company
which owns the sources and is in sole position to make changes.
-</p>
-<a name="index-education_002c-free-software-in"></a>
-<a name="index-schools_002c-free-software-in"></a>
-<p> Schools will be able to provide a much more educational environment
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-education_002c-free-software-in">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-schools_002c-free-software-in">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Schools will be able to provide a much more educational environment
by encouraging all students to study and improve the system code.
Harvard’s computer lab used to have the policy that no program could be
installed on the system if its sources were not on public display, and
upheld it by actually refusing to install certain programs. I was very
much inspired by this.
-</p>
-<p> Finally, the overhead of considering who owns the system software
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Finally, the overhead of considering who owns the system software
and what one is or is not entitled to do with it will be lifted.
-</p>
-<p> Arrangements to make people pay for using a program, including
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Arrangements to make people pay for using a program, including
licensing of copies, always incur a tremendous cost to society through
the cumbersome mechanisms necessary to figure out how much (that is,
which programs) a person must pay for. And only a police state can
@@ -290,30 +364,50 @@ intolerable even if everyone can afford to pay the air
bill. And the
TV cameras everywhere to see if you ever take the mask off are
outrageous. It’s better to support the air plant with a head tax and
chuck the masks.
-</p>
-<p> Copying all or parts of a program is as natural to a programmer as
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Copying all or parts of a program is as natural to a programmer as
breathing, and as productive. It ought to be as free.
-</p>
-<a name="Some-Easily-Rebutted-Objections-to-GNU_0027s-Goals"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Some Easily Rebutted Objections to GNU’s Goals </h3>
-
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-objections-to"></a>
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-user-support"></a>
-<a name="index-users_002c-technical-support-for-GNU"></a>
-<p>&bullet; <strong>“Nobody will use it if it is free, because that means
they can’t rely on any support.”</strong>
-</p>
-<p>&bullet;<strong>“You have to charge for the program to pay for
providing the support.”</strong>
-</p>
-<p> If people would rather pay for GNU plus service than get GNU free
+ </p>
+ <a name="Some-Easily-Rebutted-Objections-to-GNU_0027s-Goals">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Some Easily Rebutted Objections to GNU’s Goals
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-objections-to">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-user-support">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-users_002c-technical-support-for-GNU">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ &bullet;
+ <strong>
+ “Nobody will use it if it is free, because that means they can’t rely on
any support.”
+ </strong>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ &bullet;
+ <strong>
+ “You have to charge for the program to pay for providing the support.”
+ </strong>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ If people would rather pay for GNU plus service than get GNU free
without service, a company to provide just service to people who have
-obtained GNU free ought to be profitable.<a name="DOCF16"
href="#FOOT16">(16)</a>
-</p>
-<p> We must distinguish between support in the form of real programming
+obtained GNU free ought to be profitable.
+ <a href="#FOOT16" name="DOCF16">
+ (16)
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ We must distinguish between support in the form of real programming
work and mere handholding. The former is something one cannot rely on
from a software vendor. If your problem is not shared by enough
people, the vendor will tell you to get lost.
-</p>
-<p> If your business needs to be able to rely on support, the only way
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ If your business needs to be able to rely on support, the only way
is to have all the necessary sources and tools. Then you can hire any
available person to fix your problem; you are not at the mercy of any
individual. With Unix, the price of sources puts this out of
@@ -321,41 +415,66 @@ consideration for most businesses. With GNU this will be
easy. It is
still possible for there to be no available competent person, but this
problem cannot be blamed on distribution arrangements. GNU does not
eliminate all the world’s problems, only some of them.
-</p>
-<p> Meanwhile, the users who know nothing about computers need
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Meanwhile, the users who know nothing about computers need
handholding: doing things for them which they could easily do
themselves but don’t know how.
-</p>
-<p> Such services could be provided by companies that sell just
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Such services could be provided by companies that sell just
handholding and repair service. If it is true that users would rather
spend money and get a product with service, they will also be willing
to buy the service having got the product free. The service companies
will compete in quality and price; users will not be tied to any
particular one. Meanwhile, those of us who don’t need the service
should be able to use the program without paying for the service.
-<br><a name="index-GNU_002c-advertising-for"></a>
-&bullet; <strong>“You cannot reach many people without advertising, and
-you must charge for the program to support that.”</strong><br>
-&bullet; <strong>“It’s no use advertising a program people can get
-free.”</strong>
-</p>
-<p> There are various forms of free or very cheap publicity that can be
+ <br>
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-advertising-for">
+ </a>
+ &bullet;
+ <strong>
+ “You cannot reach many people without advertising, and
+you must charge for the program to support that.”
+ </strong>
+ <br>
+ &bullet;
+ <strong>
+ “It’s no use advertising a program people can get
+free.”
+ </strong>
+ </br>
+ </br>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ There are various forms of free or very cheap publicity that can be
used to inform numbers of computer users about something like GNU. But
it may be true that one can reach more microcomputer users with
advertising. If this is really so, a business which advertises the
service of copying and mailing GNU for a fee ought to be successful
enough to pay for its advertising and more. This way, only the users
who benefit from the advertising pay for it.
-</p>
-<p> On the other hand, if many people get GNU from their friends, and
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ On the other hand, if many people get GNU from their friends, and
such companies don’t succeed, this will show that advertising was not
really necessary to spread GNU. Why is it that free market advocates
-don’t want to let the free market decide this?<a name="DOCF17"
href="#FOOT17">(17)</a>
-<br><a name="index-competition_002c-impact-on"></a>
-&bullet; <strong>“My company needs a proprietary operating system to get
-a competitive edge.”</strong>
-</p>
-<p> GNU will remove operating system software from the realm of
+don’t want to let the free market decide this?
+ <a href="#FOOT17" name="DOCF17">
+ (17)
+ </a>
+ <br>
+ <a name="index-competition_002c-impact-on">
+ </a>
+ &bullet;
+ <strong>
+ “My company needs a proprietary operating system to get
+a competitive edge.”
+ </strong>
+ </br>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ GNU will remove operating system software from the realm of
competition. You will not be able to get an edge in this area, but
neither will your competitors be able to get an edge over you. You and
they will compete in other areas, while benefiting mutually in this
@@ -363,96 +482,147 @@ one. If your business is selling an operating system,
you will not
like GNU, but that’s tough on you. If your business is something else,
GNU can save you from being pushed into the expensive business of
selling operating systems.
-</p>
-<p> I would like to see GNU development supported by gifts from many
-manufacturers and users, reducing the cost to each.<a name="DOCF18"
href="#FOOT18">(18)</a>
-<br><a name="index-programmers_002c-income-for-2"></a>
-<a name="index-programmers_002c-and-creativity-and-entitlement"></a>
-&bullet; <strong>“Don’t programmers deserve a reward for their
-creativity?”</strong>
-</p>
-<p> If anything deserves a reward, it is social contribution.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ I would like to see GNU development supported by gifts from many
+manufacturers and users, reducing the cost to each.
+ <a href="#FOOT18" name="DOCF18">
+ (18)
+ </a>
+ <br>
+ <a name="index-programmers_002c-income-for-2">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-programmers_002c-and-creativity-and-entitlement">
+ </a>
+ &bullet;
+ <strong>
+ “Don’t programmers deserve a reward for their
+creativity?”
+ </strong>
+ </br>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ If anything deserves a reward, it is social contribution.
Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society
is free to use the results. If programmers deserve to be rewarded for
creating innovative programs, by the same token they deserve to be
punished if they restrict the use of these programs.
-<br>
-&bullet; <strong>“Shouldn’t a programmer be able to ask for a reward for
-his creativity?”</strong>
-</p>
-<a name="index-programmers_002c-income-for-3"></a>
-<p> There is nothing wrong with wanting pay for work, or seeking to
+ <br>
+ &bullet;
+ <strong>
+ “Shouldn’t a programmer be able to ask for a reward for
+his creativity?”
+ </strong>
+ </br>
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-programmers_002c-income-for-3">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ There is nothing wrong with wanting pay for work, or seeking to
maximize one’s income, as long as one does not use means that are
destructive. But the means customary in the field of software today
are based on destruction.
-</p>
-<p> Extracting money from users of a program by restricting their use of
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Extracting money from users of a program by restricting their use of
it is destructive because the restrictions reduce the amount and the
ways that the program can be used. This reduces the amount of wealth
that humanity derives from the program. When there is a deliberate
choice to restrict, the harmful consequences are deliberate destruction.
-</p>
-<a name="index-citizen-values_002c-Golden-Rule-1"></a>
-<p> The reason a good citizen does not use such destructive means to
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-citizen-values_002c-Golden-Rule-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The reason a good citizen does not use such destructive means to
become wealthier is that, if everyone did so, we would all become
poorer from the mutual destructiveness. This is
-<a name="index-Kantian-ethics"></a>
-Kantian ethics; or,
-<a name="index-Golden-Rule-2"></a>
-the Golden Rule. Since I do not like the consequences that result if
+ <a name="index-Kantian-ethics">
+ </a>
+ Kantian ethics; or,
+ <a name="index-Golden-Rule-2">
+ </a>
+ the Golden Rule. Since I do not like the consequences that result if
everyone hoards information, I am required to consider it wrong for one
to do so. Specifically, the desire to be rewarded for one’s creativity
does not justify depriving the world in general of all or part of that
creativity.
-<br>
-&bullet; <strong>“Won’t programmers starve?”</strong>
-</p>
-<p> I could answer that nobody is forced to be a programmer. Most of us
+ <br>
+ &bullet;
+ <strong>
+ “Won’t programmers starve?”
+ </strong>
+ </br>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ I could answer that nobody is forced to be a programmer. Most of us
cannot manage to get any money for standing on the street and making
faces. But we are not, as a result, condemned to spend our lives
standing on the street making faces, and starving. We do something
else.
-</p>
-<p> But that is the wrong answer because it accepts the questioner’s
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ But that is the wrong answer because it accepts the questioner’s
implicit assumption: that without ownership of software, programmers
cannot possibly be paid a cent. Supposedly it is all or nothing.
-</p>
-<p> The real reason programmers will not starve is that it will still be
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The real reason programmers will not starve is that it will still be
possible for them to get paid for programming; just not paid as much as
now.
-</p>
-<p> Restricting copying is not the only basis for business in software.
-It is the most common basis<a name="DOCF19" href="#FOOT19">(19)</a> because it
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Restricting copying is not the only basis for business in software.
+It is the most common basis
+ <a href="#FOOT19" name="DOCF19">
+ (19)
+ </a>
+ because it
brings in the most money. If it were prohibited, or rejected by the
customer, software business would move to other bases of organization
which are now used less often. There are always numerous ways to
organize any kind of business.
-</p>
-<p> Probably programming will not be as lucrative on the new basis as it
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Probably programming will not be as lucrative on the new basis as it
is now. But that is not an argument against the change. It is not
considered an injustice that sales clerks make the salaries that they
now do. If programmers made the same, that would not be an injustice
either. (In practice they would still make considerably more than
that.)
-<a name="index-programmers_002c-income-for-4"></a>
-<br></p>
-<p>&bullet; <strong>“Don’t people have a right to control how their
creativity is used?”</strong>
-</p>
-<a name="index-patents-1"></a>
-<a
name="index-_0060_0060intellectual-property_002c_0027_0027-bias-and-fallacy-of-term-_0028see-also-ownership_0029"></a>
-<p>“Control over the use of one’s ideas” really constitutes
+ <a name="index-programmers_002c-income-for-4">
+ </a>
+ <br/>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ &bullet;
+ <strong>
+ “Don’t people have a right to control how their creativity is used?”
+ </strong>
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-patents-1">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-_0060_0060intellectual-property_002c_0027_0027-bias-and-fallacy-of-term-_0028see-also-ownership_0029">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ “Control over the use of one’s ideas” really constitutes
control over other people’s lives; and it is usually used to make
their lives more difficult.
-</p>
-<p> People who have studied the issue of intellectual property
-rights<a name="DOCF20" href="#FOOT20">(20)</a>) for further explanation of how
this
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ People who have studied the issue of intellectual property
+rights
+ <a href="#FOOT20" name="DOCF20">
+ (20)
+ </a>
+ ) for further explanation of how this
term spreads confusion and bias.
carefully (such as lawyers) say that
there is no intrinsic right to intellectual property. The kinds of
supposed intellectual property rights that the government recognizes
were created by specific acts of legislation for specific purposes.
-</p>
-<p> For example, the patent system was established to encourage
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ For example, the patent system was established to encourage
inventors to disclose the details of their inventions. Its purpose was
to help society rather than to help inventors. At the time, the life
span of 17 years for a patent was short compared with the rate of
@@ -461,8 +631,9 @@ manufacturers, for whom the cost and effort of a license
agreement are
small compared with setting up production, the patents often do not do
much harm. They do not obstruct most individuals who use patented
products.
-</p>
-<p> The idea of copyright did not exist in ancient times, when authors
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The idea of copyright did not exist in ancient times, when authors
frequently copied other authors at length in works of nonfiction. This
practice was useful, and is the only way many authors’ works have
survived even in part. The copyright system was created expressly for
@@ -470,15 +641,18 @@ the purpose of encouraging authorship. In the domain for
which it was
invented—books, which could be copied economically only on a printing
press—it did little harm, and did not obstruct most of the individuals
who read the books.
-</p>
-<p> All intellectual property rights are just licenses granted by society
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ All intellectual property rights are just licenses granted by society
because it was thought, rightly or wrongly, that society as a whole
would benefit by granting them. But in any particular situation, we
have to ask: are we really better off granting such license? What kind
of act are we licensing a person to do?
-<a
name="index-_0060_0060intellectual-property_002c_0027_0027-bias-and-fallacy-of-term-_0028see-also-ownership_0029-1"></a>
-</p>
-<p> The case of programs today is very different from that of books a
+ <a
name="index-_0060_0060intellectual-property_002c_0027_0027-bias-and-fallacy-of-term-_0028see-also-ownership_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The case of programs today is very different from that of books a
hundred years ago. The fact that the easiest way to copy a program is
from one neighbor to another, the fact that a program has both source
code and object code which are distinct, and the fact that a program is
@@ -486,129 +660,187 @@ used rather than read and enjoyed, combine to create a
situation in
which a person who enforces a copyright is harming society as a whole
both materially and spiritually; in which a person should not do so
regardless of whether the law enables him to.
-<a name="index-programmers_002c-and-creativity-and-entitlement-1"></a>
-<br><a name="index-competition_002c-impact-on-1"></a>
-&bullet; <strong>“Competition makes things get done
-better.”</strong>
-</p>
-<p> The paradigm of competition is a race: by rewarding the winner, we
+ <a name="index-programmers_002c-and-creativity-and-entitlement-1">
+ </a>
+ <br>
+ <a name="index-competition_002c-impact-on-1">
+ </a>
+ &bullet;
+ <strong>
+ “Competition makes things get done
+better.”
+ </strong>
+ </br>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The paradigm of competition is a race: by rewarding the winner, we
encourage everyone to run faster. When capitalism really works this
way, it does a good job; but its defenders are wrong in assuming it
always works this way. If the runners forget why the reward is offered
and become intent on winning, no matter how, they may find other
strategies—such as, attacking other runners. If the runners get into
a fist fight, they will all finish late.
-</p>
-<p> Proprietary and secret software is the moral equivalent of runners
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Proprietary and secret software is the moral equivalent of runners
in a fist fight. Sad to say, the only referee we’ve got does not seem
to object to fights; he just regulates them (“For every ten
yards you run, you can fire one shot”). He really ought to
break them up, and penalize runners for even trying to fight.
-<br><a name="index-programmers_002c-incentive-for-1"></a>
-&bullet; <strong>“Won’t everyone stop programming without a monetary
incentive?”</strong>
-</p>
-<p> Actually, many people will program with absolutely no monetary
+ <br>
+ <a name="index-programmers_002c-incentive-for-1">
+ </a>
+ &bullet;
+ <strong>
+ “Won’t everyone stop programming without a monetary incentive?”
+ </strong>
+ </br>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Actually, many people will program with absolutely no monetary
incentive. Programming has an irresistible fascination for some
people, usually the people who are best at it. There is no shortage of
professional musicians who keep at it even though they have no hope of
making a living that way.
-</p>
-<p> But really this question, though commonly asked, is not appropriate
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ But really this question, though commonly asked, is not appropriate
to the situation. Pay for programmers will not disappear, only become
less. So the right question is, will anyone program with a reduced
monetary incentive? My experience shows that they will.
-</p>
-<a
name="index-AI-_0028Artificial-Intelligence_0029-Lab_002c-MIT-_0028see-also-MIT_0029-2"></a>
-<p> For more than ten years, many of the world’s best programmers worked
+ </p>
+ <a
name="index-AI-_0028Artificial-Intelligence_0029-Lab_002c-MIT-_0028see-also-MIT_0029-2">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ For more than ten years, many of the world’s best programmers worked
at the Artificial Intelligence Lab for far less money than they could
have had anywhere else. They got many kinds of nonmonetary rewards:
fame and appreciation, for example. And creativity is also fun, a
reward in itself.
-</p>
-<p> Then most of them left when offered a chance to do the same
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Then most of them left when offered a chance to do the same
interesting work for a lot of money.
-</p>
-<p> What the facts show is that people will program for reasons other
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ What the facts show is that people will program for reasons other
than riches; but if given a chance to make a lot of money as well, they
will come to expect and demand it. Low-paying organizations do poorly
in competition with high-paying ones, but they do not have to do badly
if the high-paying ones are banned.
-<a name="index-programmers_002c-incentive-for-2"></a>
-<br>
-&bullet; <strong>“We need the programmers desperately. If they demand that
we stop helping our neighbors, we have to obey.”</strong>
-</p>
-<p> You’re never so desperate that you have to obey this sort of demand.
+ <a name="index-programmers_002c-incentive-for-2">
+ </a>
+ <br>
+ &bullet;
+ <strong>
+ “We need the programmers desperately. If they demand that we stop helping
our neighbors, we have to obey.”
+ </strong>
+ </br>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ You’re never so desperate that you have to obey this sort of demand.
Remember: millions for defense, but not a cent for tribute!
-<br></p>
-<a name="index-programmers_002c-income-for-5"></a>
-<a name="index-development_002c-funding-for-2"></a>
-<p>&bullet; <strong>“Programmers need to make a living somehow.”</strong>
-</p>
-<p> In the short run, this is true. However, there are plenty of ways
+ <br/>
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-programmers_002c-income-for-5">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-development_002c-funding-for-2">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ &bullet;
+ <strong>
+ “Programmers need to make a living somehow.”
+ </strong>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ In the short run, this is true. However, there are plenty of ways
that programmers could make a living without selling the right to use a
program. This way is customary now because it brings programmers and
businessmen the most money, not because it is the only way to make a
living. It is easy to find other ways if you want to find them. Here
are a number of examples.
-</p>
-<p> A manufacturer introducing a new computer will pay for the porting of
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ A manufacturer introducing a new computer will pay for the porting of
operating systems onto the new hardware.
-</p>
-<p> The sale of teaching, handholding and maintenance services could
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The sale of teaching, handholding and maintenance services could
also employ programmers.
-</p>
-<a name="index-freeware-_0028see-also-software_0029"></a>
-<p>People with new ideas could distribute programs as
-freeware,<a name="DOCF21" href="#FOOT21">(21)</a>) for more explanation.
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-freeware-_0028see-also-software_0029">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ People with new ideas could distribute programs as
+freeware,
+ <a href="#FOOT21" name="DOCF21">
+ (21)
+ </a>
+ ) for more explanation.
asking for donations from satisfied
users, or selling handholding services. I have met people who are
already working this way successfully.
-</p>
-<p> Users with related needs can form users’ groups, and pay dues. A
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Users with related needs can form users’ groups, and pay dues. A
group would contract with programming companies to write programs that
the group’s members would like to use.
-</p>
-<a name="index-software_002c-software-tax"></a>
-<p> All sorts of development can be funded with a Software Tax:
-</p>
-<p> Suppose everyone who buys a computer has to pay <em>x</em> percent of the
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-software_002c-software-tax">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ All sorts of development can be funded with a Software Tax:
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Suppose everyone who buys a computer has to pay
+ <em>
+ x
+ </em>
+ percent of the
price as a software tax. The government gives this to an agency
like the
-<a name="index-National-Science-Foundation-_0028NSF_0029"></a>
-NSF to spend on software development.
-</p>
-<p> But if the computer buyer makes a donation to software development
+ <a name="index-National-Science-Foundation-_0028NSF_0029">
+ </a>
+ NSF to spend on software development.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ But if the computer buyer makes a donation to software development
himself, he can take a credit against the tax. He can donate to
the project of his own choosing—often, chosen because he hopes to
use the results when it is done. He can take a credit for any
amount of donation up to the total tax he had to pay.
-</p>
-
-<p> The total tax rate could be decided by a vote of the payers of the
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The total tax rate could be decided by a vote of the payers of the
tax, weighted according to the amount they will be taxed on.
-</p>
-
-<p> The consequences:
-</p>
-<ul><li>
-The computer-using community supports software development.
-
-</li><li>
-This community decides what level of support is needed.
-
-</li><li>
-Users who care which projects their share is spent on can choose this for
themselves.
-
-</li></ul><p> In the long run, making programs free is a step toward the
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The consequences:
+ </p>
+ <ul>
+ <li>
+ The computer-using community supports software development.
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ This community decides what level of support is needed.
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ Users who care which projects their share is spent on can choose this for
themselves.
+ </li>
+ </ul>
+ <p>
+ In the long run, making programs free is a step toward the
postscarcity world, where nobody will have to work very hard just to
make a living. People will be free to devote themselves to activities
that are fun, such as programming, after spending the necessary ten
hours a week on required tasks such as legislation, family counseling,
robot repair and asteroid prospecting. There will be no need to be
able to make a living from programming.
-</p>
-<a name="index-users_002c-benefit-to-1"></a>
-<p> We have already greatly reduced the amount of work that the whole
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-users_002c-benefit-to-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ We have already greatly reduced the amount of work that the whole
society must do for its actual productivity, but only a little of this
has translated itself into leisure for workers because much
nonproductive activity is required to accompany productive activity.
@@ -616,18 +848,34 @@ The main causes of this are bureaucracy and isometric
struggles against
competition. Free software will greatly reduce these drains in the
area of software production. We must do this, in order for technical
gains in productivity to translate into less work for us.
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-objections-to-1"></a>
-<a name="index-programmers_002c-income-for-6"></a>
-<a name="index-development_002c-funding-for-3"></a>
-<a name="index-_0060_0060GNU-Manifesto_0027_0027-1"></a>
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-_0060_0060GNU-Manifesto_0027_0027-1"></a>
-</p>
-<div class="footnote">
-<hr><h3>Footnotes</h3>
-<h3><a name="FOOT12" href="#DOCF12">(12)</a></h3>
-<p>The wording here was
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-objections-to-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-programmers_002c-income-for-6">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-development_002c-funding-for-3">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-_0060_0060GNU-Manifesto_0027_0027-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-_0060_0060GNU-Manifesto_0027_0027-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <div class="footnote">
+ <hr>
+ <h3>
+ Footnotes
+ </h3>
+ <h3>
+ <a href="#DOCF12" name="FOOT12">
+ (12)
+ </a>
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ The wording here was
careless. The intention was that nobody would have to pay for
-<em>permission</em> to use the GNU system. But the words don’t make this
+ <em>
+ permission
+ </em>
+ to use the GNU system. But the words don’t make this
clear, and people often interpret them as saying that copies of GNU
should always be distributed at little or no charge. That was never
the intent; later on, the manifesto mentions the possibility of
@@ -640,47 +888,105 @@ while others pay to obtain copies—and if the funds help
support
improving the software, so much the better. The important thing is
that everyone who has a copy has the freedom to cooperate with others
in using it.
-</p><h3><a name="FOOT13" href="#DOCF13">(13)</a></h3>
-<p>The expression
-<a
name="index-_0060_0060give-away-software_002c_0027_0027-misleading-use-of-term"></a>
-“give away” is another indication that I had not yet clearly
+ </p>
+ <h3>
+ <a href="#DOCF13" name="FOOT13">
+ (13)
+ </a>
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ The expression
+ <a
name="index-_0060_0060give-away-software_002c_0027_0027-misleading-use-of-term">
+ </a>
+ “give away” is another indication that I had not yet clearly
separated the issue of price from that of freedom. We now recommend
avoiding this expression when talking about free software. See “Words
to Avoid (or Use with Care)”
-</p><h3><a name="FOOT14" href="#DOCF14">(14)</a></h3>
-<p>Nowadays, for software tasks to work on, see the
-<a name="index-High-Priority-Projects-list"></a>
-High Priority Projects list, at
-<a
href="http://fsf.org/campaigns/priority-projects/";>http://fsf.org/campaigns/priority-projects/</a>,
and the
-<a name="index-GNU-Help-Wanted-list"></a>
-GNU
+ </p>
+ <h3>
+ <a href="#DOCF14" name="FOOT14">
+ (14)
+ </a>
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ Nowadays, for software tasks to work on, see the
+ <a name="index-High-Priority-Projects-list">
+ </a>
+ High Priority Projects list, at
+ <a href="http://fsf.org/campaigns/priority-projects/";>
+ http://fsf.org/campaigns/priority-projects/
+ </a>
+ , and the
+ <a name="index-GNU-Help-Wanted-list">
+ </a>
+ GNU
Help Wanted list, the general task list for GNU software packages, at
-<a
href="http://savannah.gnu.org/people/?type_id=1";>http://savannah.gnu.org/people/?type_id=1</a>.
For other ways to
-help, see <a
href="http://gnu.org/help/help.html";>http://gnu.org/help/help.html</a>.
-</p><h3><a name="FOOT15" href="#DOCF15">(15)</a></h3>
-<p>This is another place I failed
+ <a href="http://savannah.gnu.org/people/?type_id=1";>
+ http://savannah.gnu.org/people/?type_id=1
+ </a>
+ . For other ways to
+help, see
+ <a href="http://gnu.org/help/help.html";>
+ http://gnu.org/help/help.html
+ </a>
+ .
+ </p>
+ <h3>
+ <a href="#DOCF15" name="FOOT15">
+ (15)
+ </a>
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ This is another place I failed
to distinguish carefully between the two different meanings of
“free.” The statement as it stands is not false—you can get copies
of GNU software at no charge, from your friends or over the net. But
it does suggest the wrong idea.
-</p><h3><a name="FOOT16" href="#DOCF16">(16)</a></h3>
-<p>Several such companies now exist.
-</p><h3><a name="FOOT17" href="#DOCF17">(17)</a></h3>
-<p>Although it is
+ </p>
+ <h3>
+ <a href="#DOCF16" name="FOOT16">
+ (16)
+ </a>
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ Several such companies now exist.
+ </p>
+ <h3>
+ <a href="#DOCF17" name="FOOT17">
+ (17)
+ </a>
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ Although it is
a charity rather than a company, the
-<a name="index-FSF_002c-fundraising-1"></a>
-<a name="index-FSF_002c-how-you-can-help"></a>
-Free Software Foundation for 10
+ <a name="index-FSF_002c-fundraising-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-FSF_002c-how-you-can-help">
+ </a>
+ Free Software Foundation for 10
years raised most of its funds from its distribution service. You can
order things from the FSF to support its work.
-</p><h3><a name="FOOT18" href="#DOCF18">(18)</a></h3>
-<p>A group
+ </p>
+ <h3>
+ <a href="#DOCF18" name="FOOT18">
+ (18)
+ </a>
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ A group
of computer companies pooled funds around 1991 to support maintenance
of the
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-C-compiler-_0028see-also-GNU_002c-GCC_0029-1"></a>
-GNU C Compiler.
-</p><h3><a name="FOOT19" href="#DOCF19">(19)</a></h3>
-<p>I think I was mistaken in saying
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-C-compiler-_0028see-also-GNU_002c-GCC_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ GNU C Compiler.
+ </p>
+ <h3>
+ <a href="#DOCF19" name="FOOT19">
+ (19)
+ </a>
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ I think I was mistaken in saying
that proprietary software was the most common basis for making money
in software. It seems that actually the most common business model was
and is development of custom software. That does not offer the
@@ -689,22 +995,38 @@ real work in order to keep getting income. The custom
software
business would continue to exist, more or less unchanged, in a free
software world. Therefore, I no longer expect that most paid
programmers would earn less in a free software world.
-</p><h3><a name="FOOT20" href="#DOCF20">(20)</a></h3>
-<p>In the 1980s I had not yet realized how confusing it
+ </p>
+ <h3>
+ <a href="#DOCF20" name="FOOT20">
+ (20)
+ </a>
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ In the 1980s I had not yet realized how confusing it
was to speak of “the issue” of “intellectual property.” That term
is obviously biased; more subtle is the fact that it lumps together
various disparate laws which raise very different issues. Nowadays I
urge people to reject the term “intellectual property” entirely,
lest it lead others to suppose that those laws form one coherent
issue. The way to be clear is to discuss patents, copyrights, and
-<a name="index-trademarks-and_002for-trademark-law"></a>
-trademarks separately. See “Did You Say ‘Intellectual Property’? It’s
+ <a name="index-trademarks-and_002for-trademark-law">
+ </a>
+ trademarks separately. See “Did You Say ‘Intellectual Property’? It’s
a Seductive Mirage”.
-</p><h3><a name="FOOT21" href="#DOCF21">(21)</a></h3>
-<p>Subsequently we learned to distinguish between
+ </p>
+ <h3>
+ <a href="#DOCF21" name="FOOT21">
+ (21)
+ </a>
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ Subsequently we learned to distinguish between
“free software” and “freeware.” The term “freeware” means
software you are free to redistribute, but usually you are not free to
study and change the source code, so most of it is not free
software. See “Words to Avoid (or Use with Care)”.
-</p></div>
-<hr size="2"></section></body></html>
+ </p>
+ </hr>
+ </div>
+ <hr size="2"/>
+</section>
diff --git a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_40.html
b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_40.html
index 2f52c59..e3462bc 100644
--- a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_40.html
+++ b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_40.html
@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
-<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/loose.dtd";>
-<html><!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
+<!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
Free Software Foundation
@@ -19,64 +18,57 @@ ISBN 978-0-9831592-0-9
Cover design by Rob Myers.
Cover photograph by Peter Hinely.
- --><!-- Created on February 18, 2016 by texi2html 1.82
-texi2html was written by:
- Lionel Cons <address@hidden> (original author)
- Karl Berry <address@hidden>
- Olaf Bachmann <address@hidden>
- and many others.
-Maintained by: Many creative people.
-Send bugs and suggestions to <address@hidden>
---><head><title>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 40. Computing
“Progress”: Good and Bad</title><meta name="description" content="This is the
second edition of Richard Stallman's collection of essays."><meta
name="keywords" content="Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 40. Computing
“Progress”: Good and Bad"><meta name="resource-type" content="document"><meta
name="distribution" content="global"><meta name="Generator" content="texi2html
1.82"><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content= [...]
-<!--
-a.summary-letter {text-decoration: none}
-blockquote.smallquotation {font-size: smaller}
-pre.display {font-family: serif}
-pre.format {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-comment {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-preformatted {font-family: serif}
-pre.smalldisplay {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallexample {font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallformat {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smalllisp {font-size: smaller}
-span.roman {font-family:serif; font-weight:normal;}
-span.sansserif {font-family:sans-serif; font-weight:normal;}
-ul.toc {list-style: none}
--->
-</style><link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
href="../static/web-common/style.css"></head><body lang="en" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
text="#000000" link="#0000FF" vlink="#800080" alink="#FF0000" class="article">
+ -->
-<a name="Computing-Progress"></a>
-<header><div id="logo"><a href="/"><img src="../static/gnu.svg" height="100"
width="100"></a></div><h1 class="book-title">Free Software, Free Society, 2nd
ed.</h1></header><section id="main"><a
name="Computing-_0060_0060Progress_0027_0027_003a-Good-and-Bad"></a>
-<h1 class="chapter"> 40. Computing “Progress”: Good and Bad </h1>
-
-<a name="index-Horowitz_002c-Bradley"></a>
-<a name="index-UK"></a>
-<a name="index-Big-Brother"></a>
-<a name="index-New-Labour"></a>
-<a name="index-China"></a>
-<a name="index-Yahoo"></a>
-<a name="index-proprietary-software_002c-spying-on-users-2"></a>
-<p>Bradley Horowitz of
-Yahoo proposed here<a name="DOCF50" href="#FOOT50">(50)</a> that every object
in
+<section id="main">
+ <a name="Computing-_0060_0060Progress_0027_0027_003a-Good-and-Bad">
+ </a>
+ <h1 class="chapter">
+ 40. Computing “Progress”: Good and Bad
+ </h1>
+ <a name="index-Horowitz_002c-Bradley">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-UK">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Big-Brother">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-New-Labour">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-China">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Yahoo">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-proprietary-software_002c-spying-on-users-2">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Bradley Horowitz of
+Yahoo proposed here
+ <a href="#FOOT50" name="DOCF50">
+ (50)
+ </a>
+ that every object in
our world have a unique number so that your cell phone could record
everything you do—even which cans you picked up while in the
supermarket.
-</p>
-<p>If the phone is like today’s phones, it will use proprietary software:
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ If the phone is like today’s phones, it will use proprietary software:
software controlled by the companies that developed it, not by its
users. Those companies will ensure that your phone makes the
information it collects about you available to the phone company’s
database (let’s call it Big Brother) and probably to other
companies.
-</p>
-<p>In the UK of the future, as New Labour would have it, those companies
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ In the UK of the future, as New Labour would have it, those companies
will surely turn this information over to the police. If your phone
reports you bought a wooden stick and a piece of poster board, the
phone company’s system will deduce that you may be planning a protest,
and report you automatically to the police so they can accuse you of
“terrorism.”
-</p>
-<p>In the UK, it is literally an offense to be suspect—more precisely,
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ In the UK, it is literally an offense to be suspect—more precisely,
to possess any object in circumstances that create a “reasonable
suspicion” that you might use it in certain criminal ways. Your
phone will give the police plenty of opportunities to suspect you so
@@ -85,36 +77,47 @@ things will happen in China, where Yahoo has already given
the
government all the information it needed to imprison a dissident; it
subsequently asked for our understanding on the excuse that it was
“just following orders.”
-</p>
-<a name="index-cell-phones-_0028see-also-both-OpenMoko-and-Apple_0029-1"></a>
-<p>Horowitz would like cell phones to tag information automatically,
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-cell-phones-_0028see-also-both-OpenMoko-and-Apple_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Horowitz would like cell phones to tag information automatically,
based on knowing when you participate in an event or meeting. That
means the phone company will also know precisely whom you meet. That
information will also be interesting to governments, such as those of
the UK and China, that cut corners on human rights.
-</p>
-<p>I do not much like Horowitz’s vision of total surveillance. Rather, I
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ I do not much like Horowitz’s vision of total surveillance. Rather, I
envision a world in which our computers never collect, or release, any
information about us except when we want them to.
-</p>
-<a
name="index-DRM_002c-call-it-_0060_0060Digital-Restrictions-Management_0027_0027-6"></a>
-<p>Nonfree software does other nasty things besides spying; it often
+ </p>
+ <a
name="index-DRM_002c-call-it-_0060_0060Digital-Restrictions-Management_0027_0027-6">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Nonfree software does other nasty things besides spying; it often
implements digital handcuffs—features designed to restrict the users
(also called DRM, for Digital Restrictions Management). These features
control how you can access, copy, or move the files in your own
computer.
-</p>
-<p>DRM is a common practice:
-<a name="index-DRM_002c-and-Microsoft"></a>
-Microsoft does it,
-<a name="index-DRM_002c-and-Apple"></a>
-Apple does it,
-<a name="index-DRM_002c-and-Google"></a>
-Google
-does it, even the
-<a name="index-DRM_002c-and-BBC-iPlayer"></a>
-<a name="index-iPlayer_002c-BBC-_0028see-also-DRM_0029"></a>
-BBC’s iPlayer does it. Many governments, taking the
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ DRM is a common practice:
+ <a name="index-DRM_002c-and-Microsoft">
+ </a>
+ Microsoft does it,
+ <a name="index-DRM_002c-and-Apple">
+ </a>
+ Apple does it,
+ <a name="index-DRM_002c-and-Google">
+ </a>
+ Google
+does it, even the
+ <a name="index-DRM_002c-and-BBC-iPlayer">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-iPlayer_002c-BBC-_0028see-also-DRM_0029">
+ </a>
+ BBC’s iPlayer does it. Many governments, taking the
side of these companies against the public, have made it illegal to
tell others how to escape from the digital handcuffs. As a result,
competition does nothing to check the practice: no matter how many
@@ -122,32 +125,45 @@ proprietary alternatives you might have to choose from,
they will all
handcuff you just the same. If the computer knows where you are
located, it can make DRM even worse: there are companies that would
like to restrict what you can access based on your present location.
-<a
name="index-DRM_002c-call-it-_0060_0060Digital-Restrictions-Management_0027_0027-7"></a>
-</p>
-<p>My vision of the world is different. I would like to see a world in
+ <a
name="index-DRM_002c-call-it-_0060_0060Digital-Restrictions-Management_0027_0027-7">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ My vision of the world is different. I would like to see a world in
which all the software in our computers — in our desktop PCs, our
laptops, our handhelds, our phones — is under our control and
respects our freedom. In other words, a world where all software is
-<em>free</em> software.
-</p>
-<p>Free software, freedom-respecting software, means that every user of
+ <em>
+ free
+ </em>
+ software.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Free software, freedom-respecting software, means that every user of
the program is free to get the program’s source code and change the
program to do what she wants, and also free to give away or sell
copies, either exact or modified. This means the users are in
control. With the users in control of the software, nobody has power
to impose nasty features on others.
-</p>
-<p>Even if you don’t exercise this control yourself, you are part of a
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Even if you don’t exercise this control yourself, you are part of a
society where others do. If you are not a programmer, other users of
the program are. They will probably find and remove any nasty
features, which might spy on or restrict you, and publish safe
versions. You will have only to elect to use them—and since
all other users will prefer them, that will usually happen with no
effort on your part.
-</p>
-<a name="index-Stross_002c-Charles"></a>
-<p>Charles Stross envisioned computers that permanently record everything
-that we see and hear.<a name="DOCF51" href="#FOOT51">(51)</a> Those records
could be very useful, as long as
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-Stross_002c-Charles">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Charles Stross envisioned computers that permanently record everything
+that we see and hear.
+ <a href="#FOOT51" name="DOCF51">
+ (51)
+ </a>
+ Those records could be very useful, as long as
Big Brother doesn’t see and hear all of them. Today’s cell phones are
already capable of listening to their users without informing them, at
the request of the police, the phone company, or anyone that knows the
@@ -155,39 +171,105 @@ requisite commands. As long as phones use nonfree
software,
controlled by its developers and not by the users, we must expect this
to get worse. Only free software enables computer-using citizens to
resist totalitarian surveillance.
-<a name="index-cell-phones-_0028see-also-both-OpenMoko-and-Apple_0029-2"></a>
-</p>
-<a name="index-Winer_002c-Dave"></a>
-<p>Dave Winer’s article<a name="DOCF52" href="#FOOT52">(52)</a> suggested that
Mr.
-<a name="index-Gates_002c-Bill"></a>
-Gates should send a copy of
-<a name="index-Windows_002c-Vista-2"></a>
-<a
name="index-Vista_002c-Windows-_0028see-also-both-Windows-and-DRM_0029-3"></a>
-Windows Vista to
-<a name="index-Alpha-Centauri"></a>
-Alpha Centauri. I understand the feeling, but
+ <a name="index-cell-phones-_0028see-also-both-OpenMoko-and-Apple_0029-2">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-Winer_002c-Dave">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Dave Winer’s article
+ <a href="#FOOT52" name="DOCF52">
+ (52)
+ </a>
+ suggested that Mr.
+ <a name="index-Gates_002c-Bill">
+ </a>
+ Gates should send a copy of
+ <a name="index-Windows_002c-Vista-2">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Vista_002c-Windows-_0028see-also-both-Windows-and-DRM_0029-3">
+ </a>
+ Windows Vista to
+ <a name="index-Alpha-Centauri">
+ </a>
+ Alpha Centauri. I understand the feeling, but
sending just one won’t solve our problem here on Earth. Windows is
designed to spy on users and restrict them. We should collect all the
-copies of
-<a name="index-DRM_002c-and-Windows"></a>
-Windows, and of
-<a name="index-DRM_002c-and-MacOS"></a>
-<a name="index-MacOS-_0028see-also-DRM_0029-1"></a>
-MacOS and
-<a name="index-DRM_002c-and-BBC-iPlayer-1"></a>
-<a name="index-iPlayer_002c-BBC-_0028see-also-DRM_0029-1"></a>
-iPlayer for the same reason, and send
+copies of
+ <a name="index-DRM_002c-and-Windows">
+ </a>
+ Windows, and of
+ <a name="index-DRM_002c-and-MacOS">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-MacOS-_0028see-also-DRM_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ MacOS and
+ <a name="index-DRM_002c-and-BBC-iPlayer-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-iPlayer_002c-BBC-_0028see-also-DRM_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ iPlayer for the same reason, and send
them to Alpha Centauri at the slowest possible speed. Or just erase
them.
-<a name="index-Big-Brother-1"></a>
-<a name="index-proprietary-software_002c-spying-on-users-3"></a>
-</p><div class="footnote">
-<hr><h3>Footnotes</h3>
-<h3><a name="FOOT50" href="#DOCF50">(50)</a></h3>
-<p>Bradley Horowitz, “The Tech Lab: Bradley Horowitz,” <cite>BBC News,</cite>
29 June 2007, <a
href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6252716.stm";>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6252716.stm</a>.
-</p><h3><a name="FOOT51" href="#DOCF51">(51)</a></h3>
-<p>Charles Stross, “The Tech Lab: Charles Stross,” <cite>BBC News,</cite> 10
July 2007, <a
href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6287126.stm";>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6287126.stm</a>.
-</p><h3><a name="FOOT52" href="#DOCF52">(52)</a></h3>
-<p>Dave Winer, “The Tech Lab: Dave Winer,” <cite>BBC News,</cite> 14 June
2007, <a
href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6748103.stm";>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6748103.stm</a>.
-</p></div>
-<hr size="2"></section></body></html>
+ <a name="index-Big-Brother-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-proprietary-software_002c-spying-on-users-3">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <div class="footnote">
+ <hr>
+ <h3>
+ Footnotes
+ </h3>
+ <h3>
+ <a href="#DOCF50" name="FOOT50">
+ (50)
+ </a>
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ Bradley Horowitz, “The Tech Lab: Bradley Horowitz,”
+ <cite>
+ BBC News,
+ </cite>
+ 29 June 2007,
+ <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6252716.stm";>
+ http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6252716.stm
+ </a>
+ .
+ </p>
+ <h3>
+ <a href="#DOCF51" name="FOOT51">
+ (51)
+ </a>
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ Charles Stross, “The Tech Lab: Charles Stross,”
+ <cite>
+ BBC News,
+ </cite>
+ 10 July 2007,
+ <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6287126.stm";>
+ http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6287126.stm
+ </a>
+ .
+ </p>
+ <h3>
+ <a href="#DOCF52" name="FOOT52">
+ (52)
+ </a>
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ Dave Winer, “The Tech Lab: Dave Winer,”
+ <cite>
+ BBC News,
+ </cite>
+ 14 June 2007,
+ <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6748103.stm";>
+ http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6748103.stm
+ </a>
+ .
+ </p>
+ </hr>
+ </div>
+ <hr size="2"/>
+</section>
diff --git a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_41.html
b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_41.html
index 945e9b1..fa24661 100644
--- a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_41.html
+++ b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_41.html
@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
-<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/loose.dtd";>
-<html><!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
+<!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
Free Software Foundation
@@ -19,97 +18,100 @@ ISBN 978-0-9831592-0-9
Cover design by Rob Myers.
Cover photograph by Peter Hinely.
- --><!-- Created on February 18, 2016 by texi2html 1.82
-texi2html was written by:
- Lionel Cons <address@hidden> (original author)
- Karl Berry <address@hidden>
- Olaf Bachmann <address@hidden>
- and many others.
-Maintained by: Many creative people.
-Send bugs and suggestions to <address@hidden>
---><head><title>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 41. Avoiding Ruinous
Compromises</title><meta name="description" content="This is the second edition
of Richard Stallman's collection of essays."><meta name="keywords"
content="Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 41. Avoiding Ruinous
Compromises"><meta name="resource-type" content="document"><meta
name="distribution" content="global"><meta name="Generator" content="texi2html
1.82"><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; [...]
-<!--
-a.summary-letter {text-decoration: none}
-blockquote.smallquotation {font-size: smaller}
-pre.display {font-family: serif}
-pre.format {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-comment {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-preformatted {font-family: serif}
-pre.smalldisplay {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallexample {font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallformat {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smalllisp {font-size: smaller}
-span.roman {font-family:serif; font-weight:normal;}
-span.sansserif {font-family:sans-serif; font-weight:normal;}
-ul.toc {list-style: none}
--->
-</style><link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
href="../static/web-common/style.css"></head><body lang="en" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
text="#000000" link="#0000FF" vlink="#800080" alink="#FF0000" class="article">
+ -->
-<a name="Compromise"></a>
-<header><div id="logo"><a href="/"><img src="../static/gnu.svg" height="100"
width="100"></a></div><h1 class="book-title">Free Software, Free Society, 2nd
ed.</h1></header><section id="main"><a name="Avoiding-Ruinous-Compromises"></a>
-<h1 class="chapter"> 41. Avoiding Ruinous Compromises </h1>
-
-<a name="index-GNU-_0028see-also-both-software-and-GNU_0029-9"></a>
-<a name="index-FSF_002c-how-you-can-help-4"></a>
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-how-you-can-help"></a>
-<a name="index-call-to-action_002c-donate-2"></a>
-<a name="index-compromises_002c-avoiding-ruinous"></a>
-<p>The free software movement aims for a social change: to make
+<section id="main">
+ <a name="Avoiding-Ruinous-Compromises">
+ </a>
+ <h1 class="chapter">
+ 41. Avoiding Ruinous Compromises
+ </h1>
+ <a name="index-GNU-_0028see-also-both-software-and-GNU_0029-9">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-FSF_002c-how-you-can-help-4">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-how-you-can-help">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-donate-2">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-compromises_002c-avoiding-ruinous">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The free software movement aims for a social change: to make
all software free so that all software users are free and can be part
of a community of cooperation. Every nonfree program gives its
developer unjust power over the users. Our goal is to put an end to
that injustice.
-</p>
-<p>The road to freedom is a long road. It will take many steps and many
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The road to freedom is a long road. It will take many steps and many
years to reach a world in which it is normal for software users to
have freedom. Some of these steps are hard, and require sacrifice.
Some of them become easier if we make compromises with people that
have different goals.
-</p>
-<a name="index-GPL_002c-patent_002dprovisions-compromise"></a>
-<a name="index-compromises_002c-GPL-patent-provisions"></a>
-<p>Thus, the Free Software Foundation makes compromises—even major ones. For
instance, we made
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-GPL_002c-patent_002dprovisions-compromise">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-compromises_002c-GPL-patent-provisions">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Thus, the Free Software Foundation makes compromises—even major ones. For
instance, we made
compromises in the patent provisions of version 3 of the GNU General
Public License (GNU GPL) so that major companies would contribute
to and distribute GPLv3-covered software and thus bring some patents
under the effect of these provisions.
-</p>
-<a name="index-LGPL_002c-as-compromise"></a>
-<a name="index-compromises_002c-LGPL-and"></a>
-<a name="index-libraries-_0028comp_002e_0029_002c-LGPL-and-3"></a>
-<p>The Lesser GPL’s purpose is a compromise: we use it on certain chosen
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-LGPL_002c-as-compromise">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-compromises_002c-LGPL-and">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-libraries-_0028comp_002e_0029_002c-LGPL-and-3">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The Lesser GPL’s purpose is a compromise: we use it on certain chosen
free libraries to permit their use in nonfree programs because we
think that legally prohibiting this would only drive developers to
-proprietary libraries instead. We accept and install code in
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-programs-_0028see-also-software_0029-2"></a>
-GNU
+proprietary libraries instead. We accept and install code in
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-programs-_0028see-also-software_0029-2">
+ </a>
+ GNU
programs to make them work together with common nonfree programs, and
we document and publicize this in ways that encourage users of the
latter to install the former, but not vice versa. We support specific
campaigns we agree with, even when we don’t fully agree with the
groups behind them.
-</p>
-<p>But we reject certain compromises even though many others in our
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ But we reject certain compromises even though many others in our
community are willing to make them. For instance,
we endorse only the GNU/Linux distributions that have policies not to
include nonfree software or lead users to install it. To endorse
nonfree distributions would be a ruinous compromise.
-</p>
-<p>Compromises are ruinous if they would work against our aims in the
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Compromises are ruinous if they would work against our aims in the
long term. That can occur either at the level of ideas or at the
level of actions.
-</p>
-<a name="index-citizen-values_002c-consumer-values-v_002e"></a>
-<p>At the level of ideas, ruinous compromises are those that reinforce
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-citizen-values_002c-consumer-values-v_002e">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ At the level of ideas, ruinous compromises are those that reinforce
the premises we seek to change. Our goal is a world in which software
users are free, but as yet most computer users do not even recognize
freedom as an issue. They have taken up “consumer” values, which
means they judge any program only on practical characteristics such as
price and convenience.
-</p>
-<a name="index-Carnegie_002c-Dale"></a>
-<p>Dale Carnegie’s classic self-help book, <cite>How to Win Friends and
-Influence People,</cite> advises that the most effective way to
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-Carnegie_002c-Dale">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Dale Carnegie’s classic self-help book,
+ <cite>
+ How to Win Friends and
+Influence People,
+ </cite>
+ advises that the most effective way to
persuade someone to do something is to present arguments that appeal
to his values. There are ways we can appeal to the consumer values
typical in our society. For instance, free software obtained gratis
@@ -117,91 +119,127 @@ can save the user money. Many free programs are
convenient and
reliable, too. Citing those practical benefits has succeeded in
persuading many users to adopt various free programs, some of which
are now quite successful.
-</p>
-<a name="index-_0060_0060open-source_002c_0027_0027-consumer-values-and"></a>
-<p>If getting more people to use some free programs is as far as you
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-_0060_0060open-source_002c_0027_0027-consumer-values-and">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ If getting more people to use some free programs is as far as you
aim to go, you might decide to keep quiet about the concept of
freedom, and focus only on the practical advantages that make sense
in terms of consumer values. That’s what the term “open
source” and its associated rhetoric do.
-</p>
-<p>That approach can get us only part way to the goal of freedom. People
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ That approach can get us only part way to the goal of freedom. People
who use free software only because it is convenient will stick with it
only as long as it is convenient. And they will see no reason not to
use convenient proprietary programs along with it.
-</p>
-<p>The philosophy of open source presupposes and appeals to consumer
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The philosophy of open source presupposes and appeals to consumer
values, and this affirms and reinforces them. That’s why we
do not support open source.
-</p>
-<a name="index-citizen-values_002c-convenience-v_002e-6"></a>
-<p>To establish a free community fully and lastingly, we need to do
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-citizen-values_002c-convenience-v_002e-6">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ To establish a free community fully and lastingly, we need to do
more than get people to use some free software. We need to spread the
idea of judging software (and other things) on “citizen
values,” based on whether it respects users’ freedom and
community, not just in terms of convenience. Then people will not
fall into the trap of a proprietary program baited by an attractive,
convenient feature.
-</p>
-<p>To promote citizen values, we have to talk about them and show how
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ To promote citizen values, we have to talk about them and show how
they are the basis of our actions. We must reject the Dale Carnegie
compromise that would influence their actions by endorsing their
consumer values.
-<a name="index-citizen-values_002c-consumer-values-v_002e-1"></a>
-</p>
-<p>This is not to say we cannot cite practical advantage at all—we can
+ <a name="index-citizen-values_002c-consumer-values-v_002e-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ This is not to say we cannot cite practical advantage at all—we can
and we do. It becomes a problem only when the practical advantage steals
the scene and pushes freedom into the background. Therefore,
when we cite the practical advantages of free software, we reiterate
-frequently that those are just <em>additional, secondary</em> reasons
+frequently that those are just
+ <em>
+ additional, secondary
+ </em>
+ reasons
to prefer it.
-</p>
-<p>It’s not enough to make our words accord with our ideals; our
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ It’s not enough to make our words accord with our ideals; our
actions have to accord with them too. So we must also avoid
compromises that involve doing or legitimizing the things we aim to
stamp out.
-</p>
-<p>For instance, experience shows that you can attract some users to
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ For instance, experience shows that you can attract some users to
GNU/Linux if you include some nonfree programs. This could mean a
cute nonfree application that will catch some user’s eye, or a nonfree
-programming platform such as
-<a name="index-Java-5"></a>
-Java (formerly) or the Flash runtime
+programming platform such as
+ <a name="index-Java-5">
+ </a>
+ Java (formerly) or the Flash runtime
(still), or a nonfree device driver that enables support for certain
hardware models.
-</p>
-<p>These compromises are tempting, but they undermine the goal. If you
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ These compromises are tempting, but they undermine the goal. If you
distribute nonfree software, or steer people towards it, you will find
it hard to say, “Nonfree software is an injustice, a social problem,
and we must put an end to it.” And even if you do continue to say
those words, your actions will undermine them.
-</p>
-<p>The issue here is not whether people should be <em>able</em> or
-<em>allowed</em> to install nonfree software; a general-purpose system
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The issue here is not whether people should be
+ <em>
+ able
+ </em>
+ or
+ <em>
+ allowed
+ </em>
+ to install nonfree software; a general-purpose system
enables and allows users to do whatever they wish. The issue is
whether we guide users towards nonfree software. What they do on
their own is their responsibility; what we do for them, and what we
direct them towards, is ours. We must not direct the users towards
proprietary software as if it were a solution, because proprietary
software is the problem.
-</p>
-<a name="index-citizen-values_002c-distortion-of"></a>
-<p>A ruinous compromise is not just a bad influence on others. It can
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-citizen-values_002c-distortion-of">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ A ruinous compromise is not just a bad influence on others. It can
distort your own values, too, through cognitive dissonance. If you
have certain values, but your actions imply other, conflicting values,
you are likely to change your values or your actions so as to resolve
the contradiction. Thus, projects that argue only from practical
advantages, or direct people toward some nonfree software, nearly
-always shy away from even <em>suggesting</em> that nonfree software is
+always shy away from even
+ <em>
+ suggesting
+ </em>
+ that nonfree software is
unethical. For their participants, as well as for the public, they
reinforce consumer values. We must reject these compromises if we
wish to keep our values straight.
-</p>
-<a name="index-call-to-action_002c-uphold-citizen-values-publicly"></a>
-<a name="index-call-to-action_002c-beware-of-ruinous-compromises"></a>
-<a name="index-FSF_002c-resources"></a>
-<a name="index-citizen-values_002c-publicly-upholding"></a>
-<p>If you want to move to free software without compromising the goal of
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-uphold-citizen-values-publicly">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-beware-of-ruinous-compromises">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-FSF_002c-resources">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-citizen-values_002c-publicly-upholding">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ If you want to move to free software without compromising the goal of
freedom, look at the FSF’s resources area. It lists hardware and
machine configurations that work with free software, totally free
GNU/Linux distros to install, and thousands of free software packages
@@ -210,9 +248,13 @@ help the community stay on the road to freedom, one
important way is
to publicly uphold citizen values. When people are discussing what is
good or bad, or what to do, cite the values of freedom and community
and argue from them.
-</p>
-<p>A road that lets you go faster is no improvement if it leads to the
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ A road that lets you go faster is no improvement if it leads to the
wrong place. Compromise is essential to achieve an ambitious goal,
but beware of compromises that lead away from the goal.
-<a name="index-compromises_002c-avoiding-ruinous-1"></a>
-</p><hr size="2"></section></body></html>
+ <a name="index-compromises_002c-avoiding-ruinous-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <hr size="2"/>
+</section>
diff --git a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_42.html
b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_42.html
index 167efd7..7f219fe 100644
--- a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_42.html
+++ b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_42.html
@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
-<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/loose.dtd";>
-<html><!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
+<!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
Free Software Foundation
@@ -19,48 +18,30 @@ ISBN 978-0-9831592-0-9
Cover design by Rob Myers.
Cover photograph by Peter Hinely.
- --><!-- Created on February 18, 2016 by texi2html 1.82
-texi2html was written by:
- Lionel Cons <address@hidden> (original author)
- Karl Berry <address@hidden>
- Olaf Bachmann <address@hidden>
- and many others.
-Maintained by: Many creative people.
-Send bugs and suggestions to <address@hidden>
---><head><title>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 42. Overcoming Social
Inertia</title><meta name="description" content="This is the second edition of
Richard Stallman's collection of essays."><meta name="keywords" content="Free
Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 42. Overcoming Social Inertia"><meta
name="resource-type" content="document"><meta name="distribution"
content="global"><meta name="Generator" content="texi2html 1.82"><meta
http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charse [...]
-<!--
-a.summary-letter {text-decoration: none}
-blockquote.smallquotation {font-size: smaller}
-pre.display {font-family: serif}
-pre.format {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-comment {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-preformatted {font-family: serif}
-pre.smalldisplay {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallexample {font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallformat {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smalllisp {font-size: smaller}
-span.roman {font-family:serif; font-weight:normal;}
-span.sansserif {font-family:sans-serif; font-weight:normal;}
-ul.toc {list-style: none}
--->
-</style><link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
href="../static/web-common/style.css"></head><body lang="en" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
text="#000000" link="#0000FF" vlink="#800080" alink="#FF0000" class="article">
+ -->
-<a name="Social-Inertia"></a>
-<header><div id="logo"><a href="/"><img src="../static/gnu.svg" height="100"
width="100"></a></div><h1 class="book-title">Free Software, Free Society, 2nd
ed.</h1></header><section id="main"><a name="Overcoming-Social-Inertia"></a>
-<h1 class="chapter"> 42. Overcoming Social Inertia </h1>
-
-<a name="index-citizen-values_002c-convenience-v_002e-7"></a>
-<a name="index-citizen-values_002c-social-inertia-v_002e"></a>
-<a
name="index-Windows_002c-social-inertia_002c-short_002dterm-convenience_002c-and-_0028see-also-citizen-values_0029"></a>
-<p>Almost two decades have passed since the combination of GNU and Linux
+<section id="main">
+ <a name="Overcoming-Social-Inertia">
+ </a>
+ <h1 class="chapter">
+ 42. Overcoming Social Inertia
+ </h1>
+ <a name="index-citizen-values_002c-convenience-v_002e-7">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-citizen-values_002c-social-inertia-v_002e">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-Windows_002c-social-inertia_002c-short_002dterm-convenience_002c-and-_0028see-also-citizen-values_0029">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Almost two decades have passed since the combination of GNU and Linux
first made it possible to use a PC in freedom. We have come a long way
since then. Now you can even buy a laptop with GNU/Linux preinstalled
from more than one hardware vendor—although the systems they ship
are not entirely free software. So what holds us back from total
success?
-</p>
-
-<p>The main obstacle to the triumph of software freedom is social
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The main obstacle to the triumph of software freedom is social
inertia. It exists in many forms, and you have surely seen some of
them. Examples include devices that only work on Windows and
commercial web sites accessible only with Windows. If you value
@@ -70,12 +51,14 @@ students who think short-term want to learn how to use it
and ask
their schools to teach it. Schools teach Windows, produce graduates
that are used to using Windows, and this encourages businesses to use
Windows.
-</p>
-<p>Microsoft actively nurtures this inertia: it encourages schools to
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Microsoft actively nurtures this inertia: it encourages schools to
inculcate dependency on Windows, and contracts to set up web sites
that then turn out to work only with Internet Explorer.
-</p>
-<p>A few years ago, Microsoft ads argued that Windows was cheaper to run
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ A few years ago, Microsoft ads argued that Windows was cheaper to run
than GNU/Linux. Their comparisons were debunked, but it is worth
noting the deeper flaw in their argument, the implicit premise which
cites a form of social inertia: “Currently, more technical people
@@ -83,25 +66,29 @@ know Windows than GNU/Linux.” People who value their
freedom would
not give it up to save money, but many business executives believe
ideologically that everything they possess, even their freedom, should
be for sale.
-</p>
-<p>Social inertia consists of people who have given in to social inertia.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Social inertia consists of people who have given in to social inertia.
When you surrender to social inertia, you become part of the pressure
it exerts on others; when you resist it, you reduce it. We conquer
social inertia by identifying it, and resolving not to be part of
it.
-</p>
-<p>Here a weakness holds our community back: most GNU/Linux users have
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Here a weakness holds our community back: most GNU/Linux users have
never even heard the ideas of freedom that motivated the development
of GNU, so they still judge matters based on short-term convenience
rather than on their freedom. This makes them vulnerable to being led
by the nose by social inertia, so that they become part of the
inertia.
-</p>
-<a name="index-call-to-action_002c-talk-about-freedom-1"></a>
-<p>To build our community’s strength to resist, we need to talk about
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-talk-about-freedom-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ To build our community’s strength to resist, we need to talk about
free software and freedom—not merely about the practical benefits
that open source supporters cite. As more people recognize what they
need to do to overcome the inertia, we will make more progress.
-</p>
-
-<hr size="2"></section></body></html>
+ </p>
+ <hr size="2"/>
+</section>
diff --git a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_43.html
b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_43.html
index a07148e..ff81ec6 100644
--- a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_43.html
+++ b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_43.html
@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
-<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/loose.dtd";>
-<html><!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
+<!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
Free Software Foundation
@@ -19,69 +18,65 @@ ISBN 978-0-9831592-0-9
Cover design by Rob Myers.
Cover photograph by Peter Hinely.
- --><!-- Created on February 18, 2016 by texi2html 1.82
-texi2html was written by:
- Lionel Cons <address@hidden> (original author)
- Karl Berry <address@hidden>
- Olaf Bachmann <address@hidden>
- and many others.
-Maintained by: Many creative people.
-Send bugs and suggestions to <address@hidden>
---><head><title>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 43. Freedom or
Power?</title><meta name="description" content="This is the second edition of
Richard Stallman's collection of essays."><meta name="keywords" content="Free
Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 43. Freedom or Power?"><meta
name="resource-type" content="document"><meta name="distribution"
content="global"><meta name="Generator" content="texi2html 1.82"><meta
http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><style [...]
-<!--
-a.summary-letter {text-decoration: none}
-blockquote.smallquotation {font-size: smaller}
-pre.display {font-family: serif}
-pre.format {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-comment {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-preformatted {font-family: serif}
-pre.smalldisplay {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallexample {font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallformat {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smalllisp {font-size: smaller}
-span.roman {font-family:serif; font-weight:normal;}
-span.sansserif {font-family:sans-serif; font-weight:normal;}
-ul.toc {list-style: none}
--->
-</style><link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
href="../static/web-common/style.css"></head><body lang="en" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
text="#000000" link="#0000FF" vlink="#800080" alink="#FF0000" class="article">
+ -->
-<a name="Freedom-or-Power"></a>
-<header><div id="logo"><a href="/"><img src="../static/gnu.svg" height="100"
width="100"></a></div><h1 class="book-title">Free Software, Free Society, 2nd
ed.</h1></header><section id="main"><a name="Freedom-or-Power_003f"></a>
-<h1 class="chapter"> 43. Freedom or Power? </h1>
-
-<p>Written by
-<a name="index-Kuhn_002c-Bradley-M_002e"></a>
-Bradley M. Kuhn and Richard Stallman.
-<br><em>The love of liberty is the love of others; the love of power is the
love of ourselves.</em>
-</p><a name="index-Hazlitt_002c-William"></a>
-<p align="right">—William Hazlitt
-</p><br><a name="index-proprietary-software_002c-freedom-or-power_003f"></a>
-<p>In the free software movement, we stand for freedom for the users of
+<section id="main">
+ <a name="Freedom-or-Power_003f">
+ </a>
+ <h1 class="chapter">
+ 43. Freedom or Power?
+ </h1>
+ <p>
+ Written by
+ <a name="index-Kuhn_002c-Bradley-M_002e">
+ </a>
+ Bradley M. Kuhn and Richard Stallman.
+ <br>
+ <em>
+ The love of liberty is the love of others; the love of power is the love
of ourselves.
+ </em>
+ </br>
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-Hazlitt_002c-William">
+ </a>
+ <p align="right">
+ —William Hazlitt
+ </p>
+ <br>
+ <a name="index-proprietary-software_002c-freedom-or-power_003f">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ In the free software movement, we stand for freedom for the users of
software. We formulated our views by looking at what freedoms are
necessary for a good way of life, and permit useful programs to foster
a community of goodwill, cooperation, and collaboration. Our criteria
for free software specify the freedoms that a program’s users need so
that they can cooperate in a community.
-</p>
-<p>We stand for freedom for programmers as well as for other users.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ We stand for freedom for programmers as well as for other users.
Most of us are programmers, and we want freedom for ourselves as well
as for you. But each of us uses software written by others, and we
want freedom when using that software, not just when using our own
code. We stand for freedom for all users, whether they program often,
occasionally, or not at all.
-</p>
-<p>However, one so-called freedom that we do not advocate is the
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ However, one so-called freedom that we do not advocate is the
“freedom to choose any license you want for software you
write.” We reject this because it is really a form of power,
not a freedom.
-</p>
-<p>This oft overlooked distinction is crucial. Freedom is being able to make
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ This oft overlooked distinction is crucial. Freedom is being able to make
decisions that affect mainly you; power is being able to make decisions
that affect others more than you. If we confuse power with freedom, we
will fail to uphold real freedom.
-</p>
-<a name="index-developers_002c-copyright-law-favors"></a>
-<p>Making a program proprietary is an exercise of power. Copyright law
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-developers_002c-copyright-law-favors">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Making a program proprietary is an exercise of power. Copyright law
today grants software developers that power, so they and only they
choose the rules to impose on everyone else—a relatively small
number of people make the basic software decisions for all users,
@@ -93,9 +88,11 @@ reported (or stop the reports, even if they do find out). If
it breaks,
they can’t fix it; they have to wait for the developer to exercise its
power to do so. If it simply isn’t quite what they need, they are stuck
with it. They can’t help each other improve it.
-</p>
-<a name="index-Microsoft_002c-freedom-or-power_003f"></a>
-<p>Proprietary software developers are often businesses. We in the free
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-Microsoft_002c-freedom-or-power_003f">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Proprietary software developers are often businesses. We in the free
software movement are not opposed to business, but we have seen what
happens when a software business has the “freedom” to
impose arbitrary rules on the users of software. Microsoft is an
@@ -103,27 +100,36 @@ egregious example of how denying users’ freedoms can lead
to direct
harm, but it is not the only example. Even when there is no monopoly,
proprietary software harms society. A choice of masters is not
freedom.
-</p>
-<p>Discussions of rights and rules for software have often concentrated
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Discussions of rights and rules for software have often concentrated
on the interests of programmers alone. Few people in the world
-program regularly, and fewer still are
-<a
name="index-ownership_002c-developers_0027-interests-v_002e-public_0027s-prosperity-and-freedom-1"></a>
-owners of proprietary software
+program regularly, and fewer still are
+ <a
name="index-ownership_002c-developers_0027-interests-v_002e-public_0027s-prosperity-and-freedom-1">
+ </a>
+ owners of proprietary software
businesses. But the entire developed world now needs and uses
software, so software developers now control the way it lives,
does business, communicates, and is entertained. The ethical and
political issues are not addressed by the slogan of “freedom of
choice (for developers only).”
-<a name="index-developers_002c-copyright-law-favors-1"></a>
-</p>
-<p>If “code is law,”<a name="DOCF53" href="#FOOT53">(53)</a>
-then the real question we face is: who should control the code you
+ <a name="index-developers_002c-copyright-law-favors-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ If “code is law,”
+ <a href="#FOOT53" name="DOCF53">
+ (53)
+ </a>
+ then the real question we face is: who should control the code you
use—you, or an elite few? We believe you are entitled to control the
software you use, and giving you that control is the goal of free
software.
-</p>
-<a name="index-GPL-7"></a>
-<p>We believe you should decide what to do with the software you use;
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-GPL-7">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ We believe you should decide what to do with the software you use;
however, that is not what today’s law says. Current copyright law
places us in the position of power over users of our code, whether we
like it or not. The ethical response to this situation is to proclaim
@@ -132,20 +138,41 @@ exercise government power by guaranteeing each citizen’s
freedoms. That is what the GNU General Public License is for: it puts
you in control of your usage of the software while protecting you from
others who would like to take control of your decisions.
-</p>
-<p>As more and more users realize that code is law, and come to feel that
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ As more and more users realize that code is law, and come to feel that
they too deserve freedom, they will see the importance of the freedoms
we stand for, just as more and more users have come to appreciate the
practical value of the free software we have developed.
-<a name="index-proprietary-software_002c-freedom-or-power_003f-1"></a>
-</p>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-<hr><h3>Footnotes</h3>
-<h3><a name="FOOT53" href="#DOCF53">(53)</a></h3>
-<p>William J. Mitchell, <em>City of Bits: Space, Place, and the
-Infobahn</em> (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1995), p. 111, as quoted by
-Lawrence Lessig in <em>Code and Other Laws of Cyberspace, Version
-2.0</em> (New York, NY: Basic Books, 2006), p. 5.
-</p></div>
-<hr size="2"></section></body></html>
+ <a name="index-proprietary-software_002c-freedom-or-power_003f-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <div class="footnote">
+ <hr>
+ <h3>
+ Footnotes
+ </h3>
+ <h3>
+ <a href="#DOCF53" name="FOOT53">
+ (53)
+ </a>
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ William J. Mitchell,
+ <em>
+ City of Bits: Space, Place, and the
+Infobahn
+ </em>
+ (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1995), p. 111, as quoted by
+Lawrence Lessig in
+ <em>
+ Code and Other Laws of Cyberspace, Version
+2.0
+ </em>
+ (New York, NY: Basic Books, 2006), p. 5.
+ </p>
+ </hr>
+ </div>
+ <hr size="2"/>
+ </br>
+</section>
diff --git a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_46.html
b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_46.html
index f36246c..62103be 100644
--- a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_46.html
+++ b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_46.html
@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
-<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/loose.dtd";>
-<html><!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
+<!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
Free Software Foundation
@@ -19,86 +18,142 @@ ISBN 978-0-9831592-0-9
Cover design by Rob Myers.
Cover photograph by Peter Hinely.
- --><!-- Created on February 18, 2016 by texi2html 1.82
-texi2html was written by:
- Lionel Cons <address@hidden> (original author)
- Karl Berry <address@hidden>
- Olaf Bachmann <address@hidden>
- and many others.
-Maintained by: Many creative people.
-Send bugs and suggestions to <address@hidden>
---><head><title>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: Appendix A: A Note on
Software</title><meta name="description" content="This is the second edition of
Richard Stallman's collection of essays."><meta name="keywords" content="Free
Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: Appendix A: A Note on Software"><meta
name="resource-type" content="document"><meta name="distribution"
content="global"><meta name="Generator" content="texi2html 1.82"><meta
http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; char [...]
-<!--
-a.summary-letter {text-decoration: none}
-blockquote.smallquotation {font-size: smaller}
-pre.display {font-family: serif}
-pre.format {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-comment {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-preformatted {font-family: serif}
-pre.smalldisplay {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallexample {font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallformat {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smalllisp {font-size: smaller}
-span.roman {font-family:serif; font-weight:normal;}
-span.sansserif {font-family:sans-serif; font-weight:normal;}
-ul.toc {list-style: none}
--->
-</style><link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
href="../static/web-common/style.css"></head><body lang="en" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
text="#000000" link="#0000FF" vlink="#800080" alink="#FF0000" class="article">
+ -->
- <a name="Appendix-A"></a>
- <header><div id="logo"><a href="/"><img src="../static/gnu.svg" height="100"
width="100"></a></div><h1 class="book-title">Free Software, Free Society, 2nd
ed.</h1></header><section id="main"><a name="Freedom-or-Power_003f"></a>
-<a name="Appendix-A_003a-A-Note-on-Software"></a>
-<h1 class="unnumbered"><span class="roman">Appendix A: A Note on
Software</span></h1>
-
-<p>Written by Richard E. Buckman and Joshua Gay.
-<br></p>
-<p>This section is intended for people who have little or no knowledge of
+<section id="main">
+ <a name="Freedom-or-Power_003f">
+ </a>
+ <a name="Appendix-A_003a-A-Note-on-Software">
+ </a>
+ <h1 class="unnumbered">
+ <span class="roman">
+ Appendix A: A Note on Software
+ </span>
+ </h1>
+ <p>
+ Written by Richard E. Buckman and Joshua Gay.
+ <br/>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ This section is intended for people who have little or no knowledge of
the technical aspects of computer science. It is not necessary to read
this section to understand the essays and speeches presented in this
book; however, it may be helpful to those readers not familiar with
some of the jargon that comes with programming and computer science.
-</p>
-<p>A computer <em>programmer</em> writes software, or computer programs. A
-program is more or less a recipe with <em>commands</em> to tell the
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ A computer
+ <em>
+ programmer
+ </em>
+ writes software, or computer programs. A
+program is more or less a recipe with
+ <em>
+ commands
+ </em>
+ to tell the
computer what to do in order to carry out certain tasks. You are more
than likely familiar with many different programs: your Web browser,
your word processor, your email client, and the like.
-</p>
-<p>A program usually starts out as <em>source code</em>. This higher-level
-set of commands is written in a <em>programming language</em> such as C
-or Java. After that, a tool known as a <em>compiler</em> translates this
-to a lower-level language known as <em>assembly language</em>. Another
-tool known as an <em>assembler</em> breaks the assembly code down to the
-final stage of <em>machine language</em>—the lowest level—which the
-computer understands <em>natively</em>.
-</p>
-<img src="/essay/Appendix_A:_A_Note_on_Software/data/code.jpg"
alt="code"><p>For example, consider the
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ A program usually starts out as
+ <em>
+ source code
+ </em>
+ . This higher-level
+set of commands is written in a
+ <em>
+ programming language
+ </em>
+ such as C
+or Java. After that, a tool known as a
+ <em>
+ compiler
+ </em>
+ translates this
+to a lower-level language known as
+ <em>
+ assembly language
+ </em>
+ . Another
+tool known as an
+ <em>
+ assembler
+ </em>
+ breaks the assembly code down to the
+final stage of
+ <em>
+ machine language
+ </em>
+ —the lowest level—which the
+computer understands
+ <em>
+ natively
+ </em>
+ .
+ </p>
+ <img alt="code" src="/essay/Appendix_A:_A_Note_on_Software/data/code.jpg">
+ <p>
+ For example, consider the
“hello world” program, a common first program for people learning C,
which (when compiled and executed) prints “Hello World!” on the screen.
-<a name="DOCF54" href="#FOOT54">(54)</a>
-</p>
-<table><tr><td> </td><td><pre class="smallexample">int main(){
+ <a href="#FOOT54" name="DOCF54">
+ (54)
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <table>
+ <tr>
+ <td>
+ </td>
+ <td>
+ <pre class="smallexample">int main(){
printf(''Hello World!'');
return 0;
}
-</pre></td></tr></table><p>In the Java programming language the same program
would
+</pre>
+ </td>
+ </tr>
+ </table>
+ <p>
+ In the Java programming language the same program would
be written like this:
-</p>
-<table><tr><td> </td><td><pre class="smallexample">public class hello {
+ </p>
+ <table>
+ <tr>
+ <td>
+ </td>
+ <td>
+ <pre class="smallexample">public class hello {
public static void main(String args[]) {
System.out.println(''Hello World!'');
}
}
-</pre></td></tr></table><p>However, in machine language, a small section of it
may look similar to
+</pre>
+ </td>
+ </tr>
+ </table>
+ <p>
+ However, in machine language, a small section of it may look similar to
this:
-</p>
-<table><tr><td> </td><td><pre
class="smallexample">1100011110111010100101001001001010101110
+ </p>
+ <table>
+ <tr>
+ <td>
+ </td>
+ <td>
+ <pre class="smallexample">1100011110111010100101001001001010101110
0110101010011000001111001011010101111101
0100111111111110010110110000000010100100
0100100001100101011011000110110001101111
0010000001010111011011110111001001101100
0110010000100001010000100110111101101111
-</pre></td></tr></table><p>The above form of machine language is the most
basic representation
+</pre>
+ </td>
+ </tr>
+ </table>
+ <p>
+ The above form of machine language is the most basic representation
known as binary. All data in computers is made up of a series of
0-or-1 values, but a person would have much difficulty understanding
the data. To make a simple change to the binary, one would have to
@@ -106,17 +161,28 @@ have an intimate knowledge of how a particular computer
interprets the
machine language. This could be feasible for small programs like the
above examples, but any interesting program would involve an
exhausting effort to make simple changes.
-</p>
-<p>As an example, imagine that we wanted to make a change to our “Hello
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ As an example, imagine that we wanted to make a change to our “Hello
World” program written in C so that instead of printing “Hello World”
in English it prints it in French. The change would be simple; here is
the new program:
-</p>
-<table><tr><td> </td><td><pre class="smallexample">int main() {
+ </p>
+ <table>
+ <tr>
+ <td>
+ </td>
+ <td>
+ <pre class="smallexample">int main() {
printf(''Bonjour, monde!'');
return 0;
}
-</pre></td></tr></table><p>It is safe to say that one can easily infer how to
change the program
+</pre>
+ </td>
+ </tr>
+ </table>
+ <p>
+ It is safe to say that one can easily infer how to change the program
written in the Java programming language in the same way. However,
even many programmers would not know where to begin if they wanted to
change the binary representation. When we say “source code,” we do
@@ -126,14 +192,30 @@ popular programming languages are C++, Perl, and Python.
Some are
harder than others to understand and program in, but they are all much
easier to work with compared to the intricate machine language
they get turned into after the programs are compiled and assembled.
-</p>
-<p>Another important concept is understanding what an <em>operating
-system</em> is. An operating system is the software that handles input and
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Another important concept is understanding what an
+ <em>
+ operating
+system
+ </em>
+ is. An operating system is the software that handles input and
output, memory allocation, and task scheduling. Generally one
-considers common or useful programs such as the <em>Graphical User
-Interface</em> (GUI) to be a part of the operating system. The GNU/Linux
+considers common or useful programs such as the
+ <em>
+ Graphical User
+Interface
+ </em>
+ (GUI) to be a part of the operating system. The GNU/Linux
operating system contains a both GNU and non-GNU software, and a
-<em>kernel</em> called <em>Linux</em>. The kernel handles low-level tasks
+ <em>
+ kernel
+ </em>
+ called
+ <em>
+ Linux
+ </em>
+ . The kernel handles low-level tasks
that applications depend upon such as input/output and task
scheduling. The GNU software comprises much of the rest of the
operating system, including GCC, a general-purpose compiler for many
@@ -144,28 +226,67 @@ the kernel; and Bash, the GNU command interpreter that
reads your
command lines. Many of these programs were pioneered by Richard
Stallman early on in the GNU Project and come with any modern
GNU/Linux operating system.
-</p>
-<p>It is important to understand that even if <em>you</em> cannot
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ It is important to understand that even if
+ <em>
+ you
+ </em>
+ cannot
change the source code for a given program, or directly use all these
tools, it is relatively easy to find someone who can. Therefore, by
having the source code to a program you are usually given the power to
change, fix, customize, and learn about a program—this is a power that
you do not have if you are not given the source code. Source
code is one of the requirements that makes a piece of software
-<em>free</em>. The other requirements will be found along with the
+ <em>
+ free
+ </em>
+ . The other requirements will be found along with the
philosophy and ideas behind them in this collection.
-</p><div class="footnote">
-<hr><h3>Footnotes</h3>
-<h3><a name="FOOT54" href="#DOCF54">(54)</a></h3>
-<p>In other programming languages, such as
-Scheme, the <em>Hello World</em> program is usually not your first program.
+ </p>
+ <div class="footnote">
+ <hr>
+ <h3>
+ Footnotes
+ </h3>
+ <h3>
+ <a href="#DOCF54" name="FOOT54">
+ (54)
+ </a>
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ In other programming languages, such as
+Scheme, the
+ <em>
+ Hello World
+ </em>
+ program is usually not your first program.
In Scheme you often start with a program like this:
-</p><table><tr><td> </td><td><pre class="smallexample">(define (factorial n)
+ </p>
+ <table>
+ <tr>
+ <td>
+ </td>
+ <td>
+ <pre class="smallexample">(define (factorial n)
(if (= n 0)
1
(* n (factorial (- n 1)))))
-</pre></td></tr></table><p>This computes the factorial of a number; that is,
running
-<code>(factorial 5)</code>would output 120, which is computed by doing
+</pre>
+ </td>
+ </tr>
+ </table>
+ <p>
+ This computes the factorial of a number; that is, running
+ <code>
+ (factorial 5)
+ </code>
+ would output 120, which is computed by doing
5 * 4 * 3 * 2 * 1 * 1.
-</p></div>
-<hr size="6"></section></body></html>
+ </p>
+ </hr>
+ </div>
+ <hr size="6"/>
+ </img>
+</section>
diff --git a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_47.html
b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_47.html
index 48ddb55..1fb057f 100644
--- a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_47.html
+++ b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_47.html
@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
-<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/loose.dtd";>
-<html><!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
+<!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
Free Software Foundation
@@ -19,78 +18,196 @@ ISBN 978-0-9831592-0-9
Cover design by Rob Myers.
Cover photograph by Peter Hinely.
- --><!-- Created on February 18, 2016 by texi2html 1.82
-texi2html was written by:
- Lionel Cons <address@hidden> (original author)
- Karl Berry <address@hidden>
- Olaf Bachmann <address@hidden>
- and many others.
-Maintained by: Many creative people.
-Send bugs and suggestions to <address@hidden>
---><head><title>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: Appendix B: Translations
of the Term “Free Software”</title><meta name="description" content="This is
the second edition of Richard Stallman's collection of essays."><meta
name="keywords" content="Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: Appendix B:
Translations of the Term “Free Software”"><meta name="resource-type"
content="document"><meta name="distribution" content="global"><meta
name="Generator" content="texi2html 1.82"><meta http-e [...]
-<!--
-a.summary-letter {text-decoration: none
-blockquote.smallquotation {font-size: smaller
-pre.display {font-family: serif
-pre.format {font-family: serif
-pre.menu-comment {font-family: serif
-pre.menu-preformatted {font-family: serif
-pre.smalldisplay {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller
-pre.smallexample {font-size: smaller
-pre.smallformat {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller
-pre.smalllisp {font-size: smaller
-span.roman {font-family:serif; font-weight:normal;
-span.sansserif {font-family:sans-serif; font-weight:normal;
-ul.toc {list-style: none
--->
-</style><link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
href="../static/web-common/style.css"></head><body lang="en" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
text="#000000" link="#0000FF" vlink="#800080" alink="#FF0000" class="article">
+ -->
-<a name="Appendix-B"></a>
-<header><div id="logo"><a href="/"><img src="../static/gnu.svg" height="100"
width="100"></a></div><h1 class="book-title">Free Software, Free Society, 2nd
ed.</h1></header><section id="main"><a name="Freedom-or-Power_003f"></a>
- <a
name="Appendix-B_003a-Translations-of-the-Term-_0060_0060Free-Software_0027_0027"></a>
-<h1 class="unnumbered"><span class="roman">Appendix B: Translations of the
Term “Free Software”</span></h1>
-
-
-<a
name="index-_0060_0060free-software_002c_0027_0027-unambiguous-translations-of-2"></a>
-<p>The following is a list of recommended unambiguous translations of
-the term “free software” into various languages:<a name="FS-Translations"></a>
-</p>
- <ul class="toc"><li>- Afrikaans: vrye sagteware
-</li><li>- Albanian: software i lirë
-</li><li>- Arabic: <img
src="/essay/Appendix_B:_Translations_of_the_Term_“Free
Software”/data/arabic.jpg" height="24" alt="arabic"></li><li>- Belarusian: <img
src="/essay/Appendix_B:_Translations_of_the_Term_“Free
Software”/data/belarusian.jpg" alt="belarusian"></li><li>- Bulgarian: <img
src="/essay/Appendix_B:_Translations_of_the_Term_“Free
Software”/data/bulgarian.jpg" alt="bulgarian"></li><li>- Catalan: programari
lliure
-</li><li>- Chinese: <img
src="/essay/Appendix_B:_Translations_of_the_Term_“Free
Software”/data/chinese-simplified.jpg" alt="chinese-simplified"> (simplified),
<img src="/essay/Appendix_B:_Translations_of_the_Term_“Free
Software”/data/chinese-traditional.jpg" alt="chinese-traditional"> (traditional)
-</li><li>- Czech: svobodný software
-</li><li>- Croatian/Serbian: slobodni softver
-</li><li>- Danish: fri software <em>or</em> frit programmel
-</li><li>- Dutch: vrije software
-</li><li>- Esperanto: libera programaro
-</li><li>- Estonian: vaba tarkvara
-</li><li>- Farsi: <img src="/essay/Appendix_B:_Translations_of_the_Term_“Free
Software”/data/farsi.jpg" height="20" alt="farsi"></li><li>- Finnish: vapaa
ohjelmisto
-</li><li>- French: logiciel libre
-</li><li>- German: freie Software
-</li><li>- Greek: <img src="/essay/Appendix_B:_Translations_of_the_Term_“Free
Software”/data/greek.jpg" alt="greek"></li><li>- Hungarian: szabad szoftver
-</li><li>- Icelandic: frjáls address@hidden
-</li><li>- Ido: libera programaro
-</li><li>- Indonesian: perangkat lunak bebas
-</li><li>- Interlingua: libere programmage <em>or</em> libere programmario
-</li><li>- Irish: bog earraí saoire
-</li><li>- Italian: software libero
-</li><li>- Japanese: <img
src="/essay/Appendix_B:_Translations_of_the_Term_“Free
Software”/data/japanese-kanji.jpg" alt="japanese-kanji"><em>or</em> <img
src="/essay/Appendix_B:_Translations_of_the_Term_“Free
Software”/data/japanese-kana.jpg" alt="japanese-kana"></li><li>- Lithuanian:
laisva programinė įranga
-</li><li>- Malay: perisian bebas
-</li><li>- Norwegian: fri programvare
-</li><li>- Polish: wolne oprogramowanie
-</li><li>- Portuguese: software livre
-</li><li>- Romanian: software liber
-</li><li>- Russian: <img
src="/essay/Appendix_B:_Translations_of_the_Term_“Free
Software”/data/russian.jpg" alt="russian"></li><li>- Sardinian: software liberu
-</li><li>- Serbian/Croatian: <img
src="/essay/Appendix_B:_Translations_of_the_Term_“Free
Software”/data/serbian-croatian.jpg" alt="serbian-croatian"></li><li>- Slovak:
slobodný softvér
-</li><li>- Slovenian: prosto programje
-</li><li>- Spanish: software libre
-</li><li>- Swahili: Programu huru za Kompyuta
-</li><li>- Swedish: fri programvara, fri mjukvara
-</li><li>- Tagalog: malayang software
-</li><li>- Tamil: <img src="/essay/Appendix_B:_Translations_of_the_Term_“Free
Software”/data/tamil.jpg" height="20" alt="tamil"></li><li>- Turkish: özgür
yazilim
-</li><li>- Ukrainian: <img
src="/essay/Appendix_B:_Translations_of_the_Term_“Free
Software”/data/ukrainian.jpg" alt="ukrainian"></li><li>- Welsh: meddalwedd rydd
-</li><li>- Zulu: Isoftware Ekhululekile
-
-<a
name="index-_0060_0060free-software_002c_0027_0027-unambiguous-translations-of-3"></a>
-</li></ul><hr size="6"></section></body></html>
+<section id="main">
+ <a name="Freedom-or-Power_003f">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="Appendix-B_003a-Translations-of-the-Term-_0060_0060Free-Software_0027_0027">
+ </a>
+ <h1 class="unnumbered">
+ <span class="roman">
+ Appendix B: Translations of the Term “Free Software”
+ </span>
+ </h1>
+ <a
name="index-_0060_0060free-software_002c_0027_0027-unambiguous-translations-of-2">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The following is a list of recommended unambiguous translations of
+the term “free software” into various languages:
+ <a name="FS-Translations">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <ul class="toc">
+ <li>
+ - Afrikaans: vrye sagteware
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ - Albanian: software i lirë
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ - Arabic:
+ <img alt="arabic" height="24"
src="/essay/Appendix_B:_Translations_of_the_Term_“Free
Software”/data/arabic.jpg"/>
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ - Belarusian:
+ <img alt="belarusian"
src="/essay/Appendix_B:_Translations_of_the_Term_“Free
Software”/data/belarusian.jpg"/>
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ - Bulgarian:
+ <img alt="bulgarian" src="/essay/Appendix_B:_Translations_of_the_Term_“Free
Software”/data/bulgarian.jpg"/>
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ - Catalan: programari lliure
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ - Chinese:
+ <img alt="chinese-simplified"
src="/essay/Appendix_B:_Translations_of_the_Term_“Free
Software”/data/chinese-simplified.jpg">
+ (simplified),
+ <img alt="chinese-traditional"
src="/essay/Appendix_B:_Translations_of_the_Term_“Free
Software”/data/chinese-traditional.jpg">
+ (traditional)
+ </img>
+ </img>
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ - Czech: svobodný software
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ - Croatian/Serbian: slobodni softver
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ - Danish: fri software
+ <em>
+ or
+ </em>
+ frit programmel
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ - Dutch: vrije software
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ - Esperanto: libera programaro
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ - Estonian: vaba tarkvara
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ - Farsi:
+ <img alt="farsi" height="20"
src="/essay/Appendix_B:_Translations_of_the_Term_“Free
Software”/data/farsi.jpg"/>
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ - Finnish: vapaa ohjelmisto
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ - French: logiciel libre
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ - German: freie Software
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ - Greek:
+ <img alt="greek" src="/essay/Appendix_B:_Translations_of_the_Term_“Free
Software”/data/greek.jpg"/>
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ - Hungarian: szabad szoftver
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ - Icelandic: frjáls address@hidden
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ - Ido: libera programaro
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ - Indonesian: perangkat lunak bebas
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ - Interlingua: libere programmage
+ <em>
+ or
+ </em>
+ libere programmario
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ - Irish: bog earraí saoire
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ - Italian: software libero
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ - Japanese:
+ <img alt="japanese-kanji"
src="/essay/Appendix_B:_Translations_of_the_Term_“Free
Software”/data/japanese-kanji.jpg">
+ <em>
+ or
+ </em>
+ <img alt="japanese-kana"
src="/essay/Appendix_B:_Translations_of_the_Term_“Free
Software”/data/japanese-kana.jpg"/>
+ </img>
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ - Lithuanian: laisva programinė įranga
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ - Malay: perisian bebas
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ - Norwegian: fri programvare
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ - Polish: wolne oprogramowanie
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ - Portuguese: software livre
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ - Romanian: software liber
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ - Russian:
+ <img alt="russian" src="/essay/Appendix_B:_Translations_of_the_Term_“Free
Software”/data/russian.jpg"/>
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ - Sardinian: software liberu
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ - Serbian/Croatian:
+ <img alt="serbian-croatian"
src="/essay/Appendix_B:_Translations_of_the_Term_“Free
Software”/data/serbian-croatian.jpg"/>
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ - Slovak: slobodný softvér
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ - Slovenian: prosto programje
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ - Spanish: software libre
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ - Swahili: Programu huru za Kompyuta
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ - Swedish: fri programvara, fri mjukvara
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ - Tagalog: malayang software
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ - Tamil:
+ <img alt="tamil" height="20"
src="/essay/Appendix_B:_Translations_of_the_Term_“Free
Software”/data/tamil.jpg"/>
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ - Turkish: özgür yazilim
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ - Ukrainian:
+ <img alt="ukrainian" src="/essay/Appendix_B:_Translations_of_the_Term_“Free
Software”/data/ukrainian.jpg"/>
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ - Welsh: meddalwedd rydd
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ - Zulu: Isoftware Ekhululekile
+ <a
name="index-_0060_0060free-software_002c_0027_0027-unambiguous-translations-of-3">
+ </a>
+ </li>
+ </ul>
+ <hr size="6"/>
+</section>
diff --git a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_5.html
b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_5.html
index d8c9a95..8ebece3 100644
--- a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_5.html
+++ b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_5.html
@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
-<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/loose.dtd";>
-<html><!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
+<!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
Free Software Foundation
@@ -19,91 +18,87 @@ ISBN 978-0-9831592-0-9
Cover design by Rob Myers.
Cover photograph by Peter Hinely.
- --><!-- Created on February 18, 2016 by texi2html 1.82
-texi2html was written by:
- Lionel Cons <address@hidden> (original author)
- Karl Berry <address@hidden>
- Olaf Bachmann <address@hidden>
- and many others.
-Maintained by: Many creative people.
-Send bugs and suggestions to <address@hidden>
---><head><title>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 5. Why Software Should
Not Have Owners</title><meta name="description" content="This is the second
edition of Richard Stallman's collection of essays."><meta name="keywords"
content="Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 5. Why Software Should Not Have
Owners"><meta name="resource-type" content="document"><meta name="distribution"
content="global"><meta name="Generator" content="texi2html 1.82"><meta
http-equiv="Content-Type" content= [...]
-<!--
-a.summary-letter {text-decoration: none}
-blockquote.smallquotation {font-size: smaller}
-pre.display {font-family: serif}
-pre.format {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-comment {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-preformatted {font-family: serif}
-pre.smalldisplay {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallexample {font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallformat {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smalllisp {font-size: smaller}
-span.roman {font-family:serif; font-weight:normal;}
-span.sansserif {font-family:sans-serif; font-weight:normal;}
-ul.toc {list-style: none}
--->
-</style><link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
href="../static/web-common/style.css"></head><body lang="en" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
text="#000000" link="#0000FF" vlink="#800080" alink="#FF0000" class="article">
+ -->
-<a name="Why-Free"></a>
-<header><div id="logo"><a href="/"><img src="../static/gnu.svg" height="100"
width="100"></a></div><h1 class="book-title">Free Software, Free Society, 2nd
ed.</h1></header><section id="main"><a
name="Why-Software-Should-Not-Have-Owners"></a>
-<h1 class="chapter"> 5. Why Software Should Not Have Owners </h1>
-
-<a name="index-competition_002c-impact-on-2"></a>
-<a name="index-copyright_002c-digital-technology-and"></a>
-<p>Digital information technology contributes to the world by making it
+<section id="main">
+ <a name="Why-Software-Should-Not-Have-Owners">
+ </a>
+ <h1 class="chapter">
+ 5. Why Software Should Not Have Owners
+ </h1>
+ <a name="index-competition_002c-impact-on-2">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-copyright_002c-digital-technology-and">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Digital information technology contributes to the world by making it
easier to copy and modify information. Computers promise to make this
easier for all of us.
-</p>
-<p>Not everyone wants it to be easier. The system of copyright gives
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Not everyone wants it to be easier. The system of copyright gives
software programs “owners,” most of whom aim to withhold
software’s potential benefit from the rest of the public. They would
like to be the only ones who can copy and modify the software that we
use.
-</p>
-<p>The copyright system grew up with printing—a technology for
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The copyright system grew up with printing—a technology for
mass-production copying. Copyright fit in well with this technology
because it restricted only the mass producers of copies. It did not
take freedom away from readers of books. An ordinary reader, who did
not own a printing press, could copy books only with pen and ink, and
few readers were sued for that.
-</p>
-<a name="index-ownership_002c-and-Soviet_002dstyle-information-control"></a>
-<p>Digital technology is more flexible than the printing press: when
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-ownership_002c-and-Soviet_002dstyle-information-control">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Digital technology is more flexible than the printing press: when
information has digital form, you can easily copy it to share it with
others. This very flexibility makes a bad fit with a system like
copyright. That’s the reason for the increasingly nasty and draconian
measures now used to enforce software copyright. Consider these four
-practices of the
-<a name="index-Software-Publishers-Association-_0028SPA_0029"></a>
-Software Publishers Association (SPA):
-</p>
-<a name="index-copyright_002c-enforcement-measures"></a>
-<ul><li>
-Massive propaganda saying it is wrong to disobey the owners
+practices of the
+ <a name="index-Software-Publishers-Association-_0028SPA_0029">
+ </a>
+ Software Publishers Association (SPA):
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-copyright_002c-enforcement-measures">
+ </a>
+ <ul>
+ <li>
+ Massive propaganda saying it is wrong to disobey the owners
to help your friend.
-
-</li><li>
-Solicitation for stool pigeons to inform on their coworkers and
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ Solicitation for stool pigeons to inform on their coworkers and
colleagues.
-
-</li><li>
-Raids (with police help) on offices and schools, in which people are
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ Raids (with police help) on offices and schools, in which people are
told they must prove they are innocent of illegal copying.
-
-</li><li>
-Prosecution (by the US government, at the
-<a name="index-Software-Publishers-Association-_0028SPA_0029-1"></a>
-SPA’s request)
-of people such as MIT’s
-<a name="index-LaMacchia_002c-David"></a>
-David LaMacchia, not for copying software (he is not accused of
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ Prosecution (by the US government, at the
+ <a name="index-Software-Publishers-Association-_0028SPA_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ SPA’s request)
+of people such as MIT’s
+ <a name="index-LaMacchia_002c-David">
+ </a>
+ David LaMacchia, not for copying software (he is not accused of
copying any), but merely for leaving copying facilities unguarded and
-failing to censor their use.<a name="DOCF22" href="#FOOT22">(22)</a>
-
-</li></ul><p>All four practices resemble those used in the former
-<a name="index-Soviet-Union"></a>
-Soviet Union,
+failing to censor their use.
+ <a href="#FOOT22" name="DOCF22">
+ (22)
+ </a>
+ </li>
+ </ul>
+ <p>
+ All four practices resemble those used in the former
+ <a name="index-Soviet-Union">
+ </a>
+ Soviet Union,
where every copying machine had a guard to prevent forbidden copying,
and where individuals had to copy information secretly and pass it
from hand to hand as samizdat. There is of course a
@@ -112,134 +107,197 @@ political; in the US the motive is profit. But it is
the actions that
affect us, not the motive. Any attempt to block the sharing of
information, no matter why, leads to the same methods and the same
harshness.
-</p>
-<p>Owners make several kinds of arguments for giving them the power
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Owners make several kinds of arguments for giving them the power
to control how we use information:
-<a name="index-ownership_002c-and-Soviet_002dstyle-information-control-1"></a>
-</p>
-<a name="Name-Calling"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Name Calling </h3>
-
-<a name="index-ownership_002c-arguments-for"></a>
-<a name="index-users_002c-arguments-used-to-justify-control-over"></a>
-<a name="index-terminology_002c-importance-of-using-correct"></a>
-<a name="index-_0060_0060piracy_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term-2"></a>
-<a
name="index-_0060_0060intellectual-property_002c_0027_0027-bias-and-fallacy-of-term-_0028see-also-ownership_0029-2"></a>
-<a name="index-_0060_0060theft_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term"></a>
-<a name="index-_0060_0060damage_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term"></a>
-<p>Owners use smear words such as “piracy” and
+ <a name="index-ownership_002c-and-Soviet_002dstyle-information-control-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <a name="Name-Calling">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Name Calling
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-ownership_002c-arguments-for">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-users_002c-arguments-used-to-justify-control-over">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-terminology_002c-importance-of-using-correct">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-_0060_0060piracy_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term-2">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-_0060_0060intellectual-property_002c_0027_0027-bias-and-fallacy-of-term-_0028see-also-ownership_0029-2">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-_0060_0060theft_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-_0060_0060damage_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Owners use smear words such as “piracy” and
“theft,” as well as expert terminology such as
“intellectual property” and “damage,” to
suggest a certain line of thinking to the public—a simplistic
analogy between programs and physical objects.
-</p>
-<p>Our ideas and intuitions about property for material objects are about
-whether it is right to <em>take an object away</em> from someone else. They
-don’t directly apply to <em>making a copy</em> of something. But the owners
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Our ideas and intuitions about property for material objects are about
+whether it is right to
+ <em>
+ take an object away
+ </em>
+ from someone else. They
+don’t directly apply to
+ <em>
+ making a copy
+ </em>
+ of something. But the owners
ask us to apply them anyway.
-</p>
-<a name="Exaggeration"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Exaggeration </h3>
-
-<p>Owners say that they suffer “harm” or “economic
+ </p>
+ <a name="Exaggeration">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Exaggeration
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ Owners say that they suffer “harm” or “economic
loss” when users copy programs themselves. But the copying has
no direct effect on the owner, and it harms no one. The owner can
lose only if the person who made the copy would otherwise have paid
for one from the owner.
-</p>
-<p>A little thought shows that most such people would not have bought
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ A little thought shows that most such people would not have bought
copies. Yet the owners compute their “losses” as if each
and every one would have bought a copy. That is exaggeration—to
put it kindly.
-</p>
-<a name="The-Law"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> The Law </h3>
-
-<p>Owners often describe the current state of the law, and the harsh
+ </p>
+ <a name="The-Law">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ The Law
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ Owners often describe the current state of the law, and the harsh
penalties they can threaten us with. Implicit in this approach is the
suggestion that today’s law reflects an unquestionable view of
morality—yet at the same time, we are urged to regard these
penalties as facts of nature that can’t be blamed on anyone.
-</p>
-<p>This line of persuasion isn’t designed to stand up to critical
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ This line of persuasion isn’t designed to stand up to critical
thinking; it’s intended to reinforce a habitual mental pathway.
-</p>
-<p>It’s elementary that laws don’t decide right and wrong. Every American
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ It’s elementary that laws don’t decide right and wrong. Every American
should know that, in the 1950s, it was against the law in many
states for a black person to sit in the front of a bus; but only
racists would say sitting there was wrong.
-</p>
-<a name="Natural-Rights"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Natural Rights </h3>
-
-<a name="index-programmers_002c-and-creativity-and-entitlement-2"></a>
-<a
name="index-users_002c-premise-of-author-supremacy-_0028see-also-ownership_0029"></a>
-<p>Authors often claim a special connection with programs they have
+ </p>
+ <a name="Natural-Rights">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Natural Rights
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-programmers_002c-and-creativity-and-entitlement-2">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-users_002c-premise-of-author-supremacy-_0028see-also-ownership_0029">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Authors often claim a special connection with programs they have
written, and go on to assert that, as a result, their desires and
interests concerning the program simply outweigh those of anyone
else—or even those of the whole rest of the world. (Typically
companies, not authors, hold the copyrights on software, but we are
expected to ignore this discrepancy.)
-</p>
-<p>To those who propose this as an ethical axiom—the author is more
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ To those who propose this as an ethical axiom—the author is more
important than you—I can only say that I, a notable software
author myself, call it bunk.
-</p>
-<p>But people in general are only likely to feel any sympathy with the
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ But people in general are only likely to feel any sympathy with the
natural rights claims for two reasons.
-</p>
-<a name="index-software_002c-overstretched-analogy-with-material-objects"></a>
-<p>One reason is an overstretched analogy with material objects. When I
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-software_002c-overstretched-analogy-with-material-objects">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ One reason is an overstretched analogy with material objects. When I
cook spaghetti, I do object if someone else eats it, because then I
cannot eat it. His action hurts me exactly as much as it benefits
him; only one of us can eat the spaghetti, so the question is, which one?
The smallest distinction between us is enough to tip the ethical
balance.
-</p>
-<p>But whether you run or change a program I wrote affects you directly
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ But whether you run or change a program I wrote affects you directly
and me only indirectly. Whether you give a copy to your friend
affects you and your friend much more than it affects me. I shouldn’t
have the power to tell you not to do these things. No one should.
-</p>
-<p>The second reason is that people have been told that natural rights
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The second reason is that people have been told that natural rights
for authors is the accepted and unquestioned tradition of our society.
-</p>
-<p>As a matter of history, the opposite is true. The idea of natural
-rights of authors was proposed and decisively rejected when the
-<a name="index-Constitution_002c-authors_0027-natural-rights-and-US"></a>
-US
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ As a matter of history, the opposite is true. The idea of natural
+rights of authors was proposed and decisively rejected when the
+ <a name="index-Constitution_002c-authors_0027-natural-rights-and-US">
+ </a>
+ US
Constitution was drawn up. That’s why the Constitution only
-<em>permits</em> a system of copyright and does not <em>require</em>
-one; that’s why it says that copyright must be temporary. It also
+ <em>
+ permits
+ </em>
+ a system of copyright and does not
+ <em>
+ require
+ </em>
+ one; that’s why it says that copyright must be temporary. It also
states that the purpose of copyright is to promote progress—not
to reward authors. Copyright does reward authors somewhat, and
publishers more, but that is intended as a means of modifying their
behavior.
-</p>
-<p>The real established tradition of our society is that copyright cuts
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The real established tradition of our society is that copyright cuts
into the natural rights of the public—and that this can only be
justified for the public’s sake.
-<a name="index-programmers_002c-and-creativity-and-entitlement-3"></a>
-<a
name="index-users_002c-premise-of-author-supremacy-_0028see-also-ownership_0029-1"></a>
-</p>
-<a name="Economics"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Economics </h3>
-
-<p>The final argument made for having owners of software is that this
+ <a name="index-programmers_002c-and-creativity-and-entitlement-3">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-users_002c-premise-of-author-supremacy-_0028see-also-ownership_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <a name="Economics">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Economics
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ The final argument made for having owners of software is that this
leads to production of more software.
-</p>
-<p>Unlike the others, this argument at least takes a legitimate approach
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Unlike the others, this argument at least takes a legitimate approach
to the subject. It is based on a valid goal—satisfying the
users of software. And it is empirically clear that people will
produce more of something if they are well paid for doing so.
-</p>
-<p>But the economic argument has a flaw: it is based on the assumption
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ But the economic argument has a flaw: it is based on the assumption
that the difference is only a matter of how much money we have to pay.
-It assumes that <em>production of software</em> is what we want,
+It assumes that
+ <em>
+ production of software
+ </em>
+ is what we want,
whether the software has owners or not.
-</p>
-<a
name="index-software_002c-overstretched-analogy-with-material-objects-1"></a>
-<p>People readily accept this assumption because it accords with our
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-software_002c-overstretched-analogy-with-material-objects-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ People readily accept this assumption because it accords with our
experiences with material objects. Consider a sandwich, for instance.
You might well be able to get an equivalent sandwich either gratis or
for a price. If so, the amount you pay is the only difference.
@@ -247,109 +305,160 @@ Whether or not you have to buy it, the sandwich has the
same taste,
the same nutritional value, and in either case you can only eat it
once. Whether you get the sandwich from an owner or not cannot
directly affect anything but the amount of money you have afterwards.
-</p>
-<p>This is true for any kind of material object—whether or not it
-has an owner does not directly affect what it <em>is,</em> or what you
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ This is true for any kind of material object—whether or not it
+has an owner does not directly affect what it
+ <em>
+ is,
+ </em>
+ or what you
can do with it if you acquire it.
-</p>
-<p>But if a program has an owner, this very much affects what it is, and
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ But if a program has an owner, this very much affects what it is, and
what you can do with a copy if you buy one. The difference is not
just a matter of money. The system of owners of software encourages
software owners to produce something—but not what society really
needs. And it causes intangible ethical pollution that affects us
all.
-<a name="index-users_002c-arguments-used-to-justify-control-over-1"></a>
-<a name="index-ownership_002c-arguments-for-1"></a>
-</p>
-<br><p>What does society need? It needs information that is truly available
+ <a name="index-users_002c-arguments-used-to-justify-control-over-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-ownership_002c-arguments-for-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <br>
+ <p>
+ What does society need? It needs information that is truly available
to its citizens—for example, programs that people can read, fix,
adapt, and improve, not just operate. But what software owners
typically deliver is a black box that we can’t study or change.
-</p>
-<p>Society also needs freedom. When a program has an owner, the users
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Society also needs freedom. When a program has an owner, the users
lose freedom to control part of their own lives.
-</p>
-<a name="index-citizen-values_002c-cooperation"></a>
-<a name="index-_0060_0060piracy_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term-3"></a>
-<p>And, above all, society needs to encourage the spirit of voluntary
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-citizen-values_002c-cooperation">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-_0060_0060piracy_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term-3">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ And, above all, society needs to encourage the spirit of voluntary
cooperation in its citizens. When software owners tell us that
helping our neighbors in a natural way is “piracy,” they
pollute our society’s civic spirit.
-</p>
-<p>This is why we say that free software is a matter of freedom, not price.
-</p>
-<p>The economic argument for owners is erroneous, but the economic issue
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ This is why we say that free software is a matter of freedom, not price.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The economic argument for owners is erroneous, but the economic issue
is real. Some people write useful software for the pleasure of
writing it or for admiration and love; but if we want more software
than those people write, we need to raise funds.
-</p>
-<a name="index-developers_002c-funding-for"></a>
-<a name="index-programmers_002c-income-for-7"></a>
-<p>Since the 1980s, free software developers have tried various methods
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-developers_002c-funding-for">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-programmers_002c-income-for-7">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Since the 1980s, free software developers have tried various methods
of finding funds, with some success. There’s no need to make anyone
rich; a typical income is plenty of incentive to do many jobs that are
less satisfying than programming.
-</p>
-<a name="index-Stallman_002c-Richard-2"></a>
-<p>For years, until a fellowship made it unnecessary, I made a living
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-Stallman_002c-Richard-2">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ For years, until a fellowship made it unnecessary, I made a living
from custom enhancements of the free software I had written. Each
enhancement was added to the standard released version and thus
eventually became available to the general public. Clients paid me so
that I would work on the enhancements they wanted, rather than on the
features I would otherwise have considered highest priority.
-</p>
-<p>Some free software developers make money by selling support services.
-In 1994,
-<a name="index-Cygnus-Support"></a>
-Cygnus Support, with around 50 employees, estimated that
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Some free software developers make money by selling support services.
+In 1994,
+ <a name="index-Cygnus-Support">
+ </a>
+ Cygnus Support, with around 50 employees, estimated that
about 15 percent of its staff activity was free software
development—a respectable percentage for a software company.
-</p>
-<p>In the early 1990s, companies including
-<a
name="index-Intel-_0028see-also-_0060_0060trusted-computing_0027_0027_0029"></a>
-Intel,
-<a name="index-Motorola-1"></a>
-Motorola,
-<a name="index-Texas-Instruments"></a>
-<a name="index-Analog-Devices"></a>
-Analog Devices
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ In the early 1990s, companies including
+ <a
name="index-Intel-_0028see-also-_0060_0060trusted-computing_0027_0027_0029">
+ </a>
+ Intel,
+ <a name="index-Motorola-1">
+ </a>
+ Motorola,
+ <a name="index-Texas-Instruments">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Analog-Devices">
+ </a>
+ Analog Devices
Texas Instruments and Analog Devices combined to fund the continued
-development of the
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-C-compiler-_0028see-also-GNU_002c-GCC_0029-2"></a>
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GCC-2"></a>
-GNU C compiler. Most GCC development is still done
-by paid developers. The
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-compiler"></a>
-GNU compiler for the
-<a name="index-Ada-language"></a>
-Ada language was funded
-in the 90s by the
-<a name="index-Air-Force_002c-US"></a>
-US Air Force, and continued since then by a company
+development of the
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-C-compiler-_0028see-also-GNU_002c-GCC_0029-2">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GCC-2">
+ </a>
+ GNU C compiler. Most GCC development is still done
+by paid developers. The
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-compiler">
+ </a>
+ GNU compiler for the
+ <a name="index-Ada-language">
+ </a>
+ Ada language was funded
+in the 90s by the
+ <a name="index-Air-Force_002c-US">
+ </a>
+ US Air Force, and continued since then by a company
formed specifically for the purpose.
-</p>
-<p>The free software movement is still small, but the example of
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The free software movement is still small, but the example of
listener-supported radio in the US shows it’s possible to support a
large activity without forcing each user to pay.
-</p>
-<a name="index-citizen-values_002c-cooperation-1"></a>
-<p>As a computer user today, you may find yourself using a
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-citizen-values_002c-cooperation-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ As a computer user today, you may find yourself using a
proprietary program. If your friend asks to make a copy, it would be wrong to
refuse. Cooperation is more important than copyright. But
underground, closet cooperation does not make for a good society. A
person should aspire to live an upright life openly with pride, and
this means saying no to proprietary software.
-</p>
-<p>You deserve to be able to cooperate openly and freely with other
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ You deserve to be able to cooperate openly and freely with other
people who use software. You deserve to be able to learn how the
software works, and to teach your students with it. You deserve to be
able to hire your favorite programmer to fix it when it breaks.
-</p>
-<p>You deserve free software.
-</p><div class="footnote">
-<hr><h3>Footnotes</h3>
-<h3><a name="FOOT22" href="#DOCF22">(22)</a></h3>
-<p>The charges were subsequently
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ You deserve free software.
+ </p>
+ <div class="footnote">
+ <hr>
+ <h3>
+ Footnotes
+ </h3>
+ <h3>
+ <a href="#DOCF22" name="FOOT22">
+ (22)
+ </a>
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ The charges were subsequently
dismissed.
-</p></div>
-<hr size="2"></section></body></html>
+ </p>
+ </hr>
+ </div>
+ <hr size="2"/>
+ </br>
+</section>
diff --git a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_6.html
b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_6.html
index 096db77..3503fd9 100644
--- a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_6.html
+++ b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_6.html
@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
-<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/loose.dtd";>
-<html><!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
+<!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
Free Software Foundation
@@ -19,58 +18,43 @@ ISBN 978-0-9831592-0-9
Cover design by Rob Myers.
Cover photograph by Peter Hinely.
- --><!-- Created on February 18, 2016 by texi2html 1.82
-texi2html was written by:
- Lionel Cons <address@hidden> (original author)
- Karl Berry <address@hidden>
- Olaf Bachmann <address@hidden>
- and many others.
-Maintained by: Many creative people.
-Send bugs and suggestions to <address@hidden>
---><head><title>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 6. Why Software Should
Be Free</title><meta name="description" content="This is the second edition of
Richard Stallman's collection of essays."><meta name="keywords" content="Free
Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 6. Why Software Should Be Free"><meta
name="resource-type" content="document"><meta name="distribution"
content="global"><meta name="Generator" content="texi2html 1.82"><meta
http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; char [...]
-<!--
-a.summary-letter {text-decoration: none}
-blockquote.smallquotation {font-size: smaller}
-pre.display {font-family: serif}
-pre.format {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-comment {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-preformatted {font-family: serif}
-pre.smalldisplay {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallexample {font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallformat {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smalllisp {font-size: smaller}
-span.roman {font-family:serif; font-weight:normal;}
-span.sansserif {font-family:sans-serif; font-weight:normal;}
-ul.toc {list-style: none}
--->
-</style><link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
href="../static/web-common/style.css"></head><body lang="en" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
text="#000000" link="#0000FF" vlink="#800080" alink="#FF0000" class="article">
+ -->
-<a name="Should-Be-Free"></a>
-<header><div id="logo"><a href="/"><img src="../static/gnu.svg" height="100"
width="100"></a></div><h1 class="book-title">Free Software, Free Society, 2nd
ed.</h1></header><section id="main"><a name="Why-Software-Should-Be-Free"></a>
-<h1 class="chapter"> 6. Why Software Should Be Free </h1>
-
-<a name="Introduction"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Introduction </h3>
-
-<a
name="index-ownership_002c-developers_0027-interests-v_002e-public_0027s-prosperity-and-freedom"></a>
-<p>The existence of software inevitably raises the question of how
+<section id="main">
+ <a name="Why-Software-Should-Be-Free">
+ </a>
+ <h1 class="chapter">
+ 6. Why Software Should Be Free
+ </h1>
+ <a name="Introduction">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Introduction
+ </h3>
+ <a
name="index-ownership_002c-developers_0027-interests-v_002e-public_0027s-prosperity-and-freedom">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The existence of software inevitably raises the question of how
decisions about its use should be made. For example, suppose one
individual who has a copy of a program meets another who would like a
copy. It is possible for them to copy the program; who should decide
whether this is done? The individuals involved? Or another party,
called the “owner”?
-</p>
-<p> Software developers typically consider these questions on the
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Software developers typically consider these questions on the
assumption that the criterion for the answer is to maximize developers’
profits. The political power of business has led to the government
adoption of both this criterion and the answer proposed by the
developers: that the program has an owner, typically a corporation
associated with its development.
-</p>
-<p> I would like to consider the same question using a different
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ I would like to consider the same question using a different
criterion: the prosperity and freedom of the public in general.
-</p>
-<p> This answer cannot be decided by current law—the law should
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ This answer cannot be decided by current law—the law should
conform to ethics, not the other way around. Nor does current
practice decide this question, although it may suggest possible
answers. The only way to judge is to see who is helped and who is
@@ -78,27 +62,43 @@ hurt by recognizing owners of software, why, and how much.
In other
words, we should perform a cost-benefit analysis on behalf of society
as a whole, taking account of individual freedom as well as production
of material goods.
-</p>
-<p> In this essay, I will describe the effects of having owners, and
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ In this essay, I will describe the effects of having owners, and
show that the results are detrimental. My conclusion is that
programmers have the duty to encourage others to share, redistribute,
study, and improve the software we write: in other words, to write
-“free” software.<a name="DOCF23" href="#FOOT23">(23)</a>
-</p>
-<a name="How-Owners-Justify-Their-Power"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> How Owners Justify Their Power </h3>
-
-<a name="index-ownership_002c-arguments-for-2"></a>
-<p> Those who benefit from the current system where programs are property
+“free” software.
+ <a href="#FOOT23" name="DOCF23">
+ (23)
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <a name="How-Owners-Justify-Their-Power">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ How Owners Justify Their Power
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-ownership_002c-arguments-for-2">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Those who benefit from the current system where programs are property
offer two arguments in support of their claims to own programs: the
emotional argument and the economic argument.
-</p>
-
-<p> The emotional argument goes like this: “I put my sweat, my
-heart, my soul into this program. It comes from <em>me,</em>
-it’s <em>mine</em>!”
-</p>
-<p> This argument does not require serious refutation. The feeling of
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The emotional argument goes like this: “I put my sweat, my
+heart, my soul into this program. It comes from
+ <em>
+ me,
+ </em>
+ it’s
+ <em>
+ mine
+ </em>
+ !”
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ This argument does not require serious refutation. The feeling of
attachment is one that programmers can cultivate when it suits them;
it is not inevitable. Consider, for example, how willingly the same
programmers usually sign over all rights to a large corporation for a
@@ -108,27 +108,32 @@ even sign their names to their work. To them, the name of
the artist
was not important. What mattered was that the work was done—and
the purpose it would serve. This view prevailed for hundreds of
years.
-</p>
-<p> The economic argument goes like this: “I want to get
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The economic argument goes like this: “I want to get
rich”—usually described inaccurately as “making a living”—“and
if you don’t allow me to get rich by programming, then I won’t
program. Everyone else is like me, so nobody will ever program. And
then you’ll be stuck with no programs at all!” This threat is
usually veiled as friendly advice from the wise.
-</p>
-<p> I’ll explain later why this threat is a bluff. First I want to
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ I’ll explain later why this threat is a bluff. First I want to
address an implicit assumption that is more visible in another
formulation of the argument.
-</p>
-<p> This formulation starts by comparing the social utility of a
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ This formulation starts by comparing the social utility of a
proprietary program with that of no program, and then concludes that
proprietary software development is, on the whole, beneficial, and
should be encouraged. The fallacy here is in comparing only two
outcomes—proprietary software versus no software—and assuming
there are no other possibilities.
-</p>
-<a name="index-copyright-_0028see-also-both-copyleft-and-DMCA_0029-2"></a>
-<p> Given a system of software copyright, software development is
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-copyright-_0028see-also-both-copyleft-and-DMCA_0029-2">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Given a system of software copyright, software development is
usually linked with the existence of an owner who controls the
software’s use. As long as this linkage exists, we are often faced with
the choice of proprietary software or none. However, this linkage is
@@ -136,78 +141,106 @@ not inherent or inevitable; it is a consequence of the
specific
social/legal policy decision that we are questioning: the decision to
have owners. To formulate the choice as between proprietary software
versus no software is begging the question.
-<a name="index-ownership_002c-arguments-for-3"></a>
-</p>
-<a name="The-Argument-against-Having-Owners"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> The Argument against Having Owners </h3>
-
-<a name="index-ownership_002c-argument-against"></a>
-<p> The question at hand is, “Should development of software be linked
+ <a name="index-ownership_002c-arguments-for-3">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <a name="The-Argument-against-Having-Owners">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ The Argument against Having Owners
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-ownership_002c-argument-against">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The question at hand is, “Should development of software be linked
with having owners to restrict the use of it?”
-</p>
-<p> In order to decide this, we have to judge the effect on society of
-each of those two activities <em>independently</em>: the effect of developing
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ In order to decide this, we have to judge the effect on society of
+each of those two activities
+ <em>
+ independently
+ </em>
+ : the effect of developing
the software (regardless of its terms of distribution), and the effect
of restricting its use (assuming the software has been developed). If
one of these activities is helpful and the other is harmful, we would be
better off dropping the linkage and doing only the helpful one.
-</p>
-<p> To put it another way, if restricting the distribution of a program
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ To put it another way, if restricting the distribution of a program
already developed is harmful to society overall, then an ethical
software developer will reject the option of doing so.
-</p>
-<p> To determine the effect of restricting sharing, we need to compare
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ To determine the effect of restricting sharing, we need to compare
the value to society of a restricted (i.e., proprietary) program with
that of the same program, available to everyone. This means comparing
two possible worlds.
-</p>
-<p> This analysis also addresses the simple counterargument sometimes
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ This analysis also addresses the simple counterargument sometimes
made that “the benefit to the neighbor of giving him or her a
copy of a program is cancelled by the harm done to the owner.”
This counterargument assumes that the harm and the benefit are equal
in magnitude. The analysis involves comparing these magnitudes, and
shows that the benefit is much greater.
-</p>
-<p> To elucidate this argument, let’s apply it in another area: road
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ To elucidate this argument, let’s apply it in another area: road
construction.
-</p>
-<p> It would be possible to fund the construction of all roads with
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ It would be possible to fund the construction of all roads with
tolls. This would entail having toll booths at all street corners.
Such a system would provide a great incentive to improve roads. It
would also have the virtue of causing the users of any given road to
pay for that road. However, a toll booth is an artificial obstruction
to smooth driving—artificial, because it is not a consequence of
how roads or cars work.
-</p>
-<p> Comparing free roads and toll roads by their usefulness, we find that
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Comparing free roads and toll roads by their usefulness, we find that
(all else being equal) roads without toll booths are cheaper to
construct, cheaper to run, safer, and more efficient to
-use.<a name="DOCF24" href="#FOOT24">(24)</a> In a poor country, tolls may make
the roads unavailable to
+use.
+ <a href="#FOOT24" name="DOCF24">
+ (24)
+ </a>
+ In a poor country, tolls may make the roads unavailable to
many citizens. The roads without toll booths thus offer more benefit
to society at less cost; they are preferable for society. Therefore,
society should choose to fund roads in another way, not by means of
toll booths. Use of roads, once built, should be free.
-</p>
-<p> When the advocates of toll booths propose them as <em>merely</em> a
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ When the advocates of toll booths propose them as
+ <em>
+ merely
+ </em>
+ a
way of raising funds, they distort the choice that is available. Toll
booths do raise funds, but they do something else as well: in effect,
they degrade the road. The toll road is not as good as the free road;
giving us more or technically superior roads may not be an improvement
if this means substituting toll roads for free roads.
-</p>
-<p> Of course, the construction of a free road does cost money, which the
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Of course, the construction of a free road does cost money, which the
public must somehow pay. However, this does not imply the inevitability
of toll booths. We who must in either case pay will get more value for
our money by buying a free road.
-</p>
-<p> I am not saying that a toll road is worse than no road at all.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ I am not saying that a toll road is worse than no road at all.
That would be true if the toll were so great that hardly anyone used
the road—but this is an unlikely policy for a toll collector.
However, as long as the toll booths cause significant waste and
inconvenience, it is better to raise the funds in a less obstructive
fashion.
-</p>
-<p> To apply the same argument to software development, I will now show
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ To apply the same argument to software development, I will now show
that having “toll booths” for useful software programs
costs society dearly: it makes the programs more expensive to
construct, more expensive to distribute, and less satisfying and
@@ -215,65 +248,89 @@ efficient to use. It will follow that program
construction should be
encouraged in some other way. Then I will go on to explain other
methods of encouraging and (to the extent actually necessary) funding
software development.
-<a name="index-ownership_002c-argument-against-1"></a>
-</p>
-<a name="The-Harm-Done-by-Obstructing-Software"></a>
-<h4 class="subsubheading"> The Harm Done by Obstructing Software </h4>
-
-<a name="index-ownership_002c-obstructing-software"></a>
-<p> Consider for a moment that a program has been developed, and any
+ <a name="index-ownership_002c-argument-against-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <a name="The-Harm-Done-by-Obstructing-Software">
+ </a>
+ <h4 class="subsubheading">
+ The Harm Done by Obstructing Software
+ </h4>
+ <a name="index-ownership_002c-obstructing-software">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Consider for a moment that a program has been developed, and any
necessary payments for its development have been made; now society must
choose either to make it proprietary or allow free sharing and use.
Assume that the existence of the program and its availability is a
-desirable thing.<a name="DOCF25" href="#FOOT25">(25)</a>
-</p>
-<p> Restrictions on the distribution and modification of the program
+desirable thing.
+ <a href="#FOOT25" name="DOCF25">
+ (25)
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Restrictions on the distribution and modification of the program
cannot facilitate its use. They can only interfere. So the effect can
only be negative. But how much? And what kind?
-</p>
-<a name="index-users_002c-material-harm-to"></a>
-<p> Three different levels of material harm come from such obstruction:
-</p>
-<ul><li>
-Fewer people use the program.
-
-</li><li>
-None of the users can adapt or fix the program.
-
-</li><li>
-Other developers cannot learn from the program, or base new work on it.
-
-</li></ul><a name="index-users_002c-psychosocial-harm-to"></a>
-<p> Each level of material harm has a concomitant form of psychosocial
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-users_002c-material-harm-to">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Three different levels of material harm come from such obstruction:
+ </p>
+ <ul>
+ <li>
+ Fewer people use the program.
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ None of the users can adapt or fix the program.
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ Other developers cannot learn from the program, or base new work on it.
+ </li>
+ </ul>
+ <a name="index-users_002c-psychosocial-harm-to">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Each level of material harm has a concomitant form of psychosocial
harm. This refers to the effect that people’s decisions have on their
subsequent feelings, attitudes, and predispositions. These changes in
people’s ways of thinking will then have a further effect on their
relationships with their fellow citizens, and can have material
consequences.
-</p>
-<p> The three levels of material harm waste part of the value that the
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The three levels of material harm waste part of the value that the
program could contribute, but they cannot reduce it to zero. If they
waste nearly all the value of the program, then writing the program
harms society by at most the effort that went into writing the program.
Arguably a program that is profitable to sell must provide some net
direct material benefit.
-</p>
-<p> However, taking account of the concomitant psychosocial harm, there
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ However, taking account of the concomitant psychosocial harm, there
is no limit to the harm that proprietary software development can do.
-<a name="index-ownership_002c-obstructing-software-1"></a>
-</p>
-<a name="Obstructing-Use-of-Programs"></a>
-<h4 class="subsubheading"> Obstructing Use of Programs </h4>
-
-<a name="index-ownership_002c-and-material-harm"></a>
-<a name="index-ownership_002c-obstructing-use-of-programs"></a>
-<p> The first level of harm impedes the simple use of a program. A copy
+ <a name="index-ownership_002c-obstructing-software-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <a name="Obstructing-Use-of-Programs">
+ </a>
+ <h4 class="subsubheading">
+ Obstructing Use of Programs
+ </h4>
+ <a name="index-ownership_002c-and-material-harm">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-ownership_002c-obstructing-use-of-programs">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The first level of harm impedes the simple use of a program. A copy
of a program has nearly zero marginal cost (and you can pay this cost by
doing the work yourself), so in a free market, it would have nearly zero
price. A license fee is a significant disincentive to use the program.
If a widely useful program is proprietary, far fewer people will use it.
-</p>
-<p> It is easy to show that the total contribution of a program to
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ It is easy to show that the total contribution of a program to
society is reduced by assigning an owner to it. Each potential user of
the program, faced with the need to pay to use it, may choose to pay,
or may forego use of the program. When a user chooses to pay, this is a
@@ -281,62 +338,80 @@ zero-sum transfer of wealth between two parties. But each
time someone
chooses to forego use of the program, this harms that person without
benefiting anyone. The sum of negative numbers and zeros must be
negative.
-</p>
-<p> But this does not reduce the amount of work it takes to <em>develop</em>
-the program. As a result, the efficiency of the whole process, in
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ But this does not reduce the amount of work it takes to
+ <em>
+ develop
+ </em>
+ the program. As a result, the efficiency of the whole process, in
delivered user satisfaction per hour of work, is reduced.
-</p>
-<p> This reflects a crucial difference between copies of programs and
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ This reflects a crucial difference between copies of programs and
cars, chairs, or sandwiches. There is no copying machine for material
objects outside of science fiction. But programs are easy to copy;
anyone can produce as many copies as are wanted, with very little
effort. This isn’t true for material objects because matter is
conserved: each new copy has to be built from raw materials in the same
way that the first copy was built.
-</p>
-<p> With material objects, a disincentive to use them makes sense,
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ With material objects, a disincentive to use them makes sense,
because fewer objects bought means less raw material and work needed
to make them. It’s true that there is usually also a startup cost, a
development cost, which is spread over the production run. But as long
as the marginal cost of production is significant, adding a share of the
development cost does not make a qualitative difference. And it does
not require restrictions on the freedom of ordinary users.
-</p>
-<p> However, imposing a price on something that would otherwise be free
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ However, imposing a price on something that would otherwise be free
is a qualitative change. A centrally imposed fee for software
distribution becomes a powerful disincentive.
-</p>
-<p> What’s more, central production as now practiced is inefficient even
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ What’s more, central production as now practiced is inefficient even
as a means of delivering copies of software. This system involves
enclosing physical disks or tapes in superfluous packaging, shipping
large numbers of them around the world, and storing them for sale. This
cost is presented as an expense of doing business; in truth, it is part
of the waste caused by having owners.
-<a name="index-ownership_002c-and-material-harm-1"></a>
-<a name="index-ownership_002c-obstructing-use-of-programs-1"></a>
-</p>
-<a name="Damaging-Social-Cohesion"></a>
-<h4 class="subsubheading"> Damaging Social Cohesion </h4>
-
-<a name="index-programmers_002c-and-cognitive-dissonance"></a>
-<a name="index-ownership_002c-and-damage-to-social-cohesion-1"></a>
-<a name="index-citizen-values_002c-cooperation-2"></a>
-<p> Suppose that both you and your neighbor would find it useful to run a
+ <a name="index-ownership_002c-and-material-harm-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-ownership_002c-obstructing-use-of-programs-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <a name="Damaging-Social-Cohesion">
+ </a>
+ <h4 class="subsubheading">
+ Damaging Social Cohesion
+ </h4>
+ <a name="index-programmers_002c-and-cognitive-dissonance">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-ownership_002c-and-damage-to-social-cohesion-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-citizen-values_002c-cooperation-2">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Suppose that both you and your neighbor would find it useful to run a
certain program. In ethical concern for your neighbor, you should feel
that proper handling of the situation will enable both of you to use it.
A proposal to permit only one of you to use the program, while
restraining the other, is divisive; neither you nor your neighbor should
find it acceptable.
-</p>
-<p> Signing a typical software license agreement means betraying your
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Signing a typical software license agreement means betraying your
neighbor: “I promise to deprive my neighbor of this program so
that I can have a copy for myself.” People who make such choices
feel internal psychological pressure to justify them, by downgrading
the importance of helping one’s neighbors—thus public spirit
suffers. This is psychosocial harm associated with the material harm
of discouraging use of the program.
-</p>
-<p> Many users unconsciously recognize the wrong of refusing to share, so
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Many users unconsciously recognize the wrong of refusing to share, so
they decide to ignore the licenses and laws, and share programs anyway.
But they often feel guilty about doing so. They know that they must
break the laws in order to be good neighbors, but they still consider
@@ -344,8 +419,9 @@ the laws authoritative, and they conclude that being a good
neighbor
(which they are) is naughty or shameful. That is also a kind of
psychosocial harm, but one can escape it by deciding that these licenses
and laws have no moral force.
-</p>
-<p> Programmers also suffer psychosocial harm knowing that many users
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Programmers also suffer psychosocial harm knowing that many users
will not be allowed to use their work. This leads to an attitude of
cynicism or denial. A programmer may describe enthusiastically the
work that he finds technically exciting; then when asked, “Will I be
@@ -353,42 +429,59 @@ permitted to use it?” his face falls, and he admits the
answer is no.
To avoid feeling discouraged, he either ignores this fact most of the
time or adopts a cynical stance designed to minimize the importance of
it.
-</p>
-<p> Since the age of Reagan, the greatest scarcity in the United States
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Since the age of Reagan, the greatest scarcity in the United States
is not technical innovation, but rather the willingness to work together
for the public good. It makes no sense to encourage the former at the
expense of the latter.
-<a name="index-programmers_002c-and-cognitive-dissonance-1"></a>
-<a name="index-ownership_002c-and-damage-to-social-cohesion-2"></a>
-<a name="index-citizen-values_002c-cooperation-3"></a>
-</p>
-<a name="Obstructing-Custom-Adaptation-of-Programs"></a>
-<h4 class="subsubheading"> Obstructing Custom Adaptation of Programs </h4>
-
-<a name="index-ownership_002c-and-material-harm-2"></a>
-<p> The second level of material harm is the inability to adapt programs.
+ <a name="index-programmers_002c-and-cognitive-dissonance-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-ownership_002c-and-damage-to-social-cohesion-2">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-citizen-values_002c-cooperation-3">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <a name="Obstructing-Custom-Adaptation-of-Programs">
+ </a>
+ <h4 class="subsubheading">
+ Obstructing Custom Adaptation of Programs
+ </h4>
+ <a name="index-ownership_002c-and-material-harm-2">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The second level of material harm is the inability to adapt programs.
The ease of modification of software is one of its great advantages over
older technology. But most commercially available software isn’t
available for modification, even after you buy it. It’s available for
you to take it or leave it, as a black box—that is all.
-</p>
-<p> A program that you can run consists of a series of numbers whose
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ A program that you can run consists of a series of numbers whose
meaning is obscure. No one, not even a good programmer, can easily
change the numbers to make the program do something different.
-</p>
-<p> Programmers normally work with the “source code” for a
-program, which is written in a programming language such as
-<a name="index-Fortran"></a>
-Fortran or
-<a name="index-C-1"></a>
-C. It uses names to designate the data being used and the parts of
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Programmers normally work with the “source code” for a
+program, which is written in a programming language such as
+ <a name="index-Fortran">
+ </a>
+ Fortran or
+ <a name="index-C-1">
+ </a>
+ C. It uses names to designate the data being used and the parts of
the program, and it represents operations with symbols such as
‘+’ for addition and ‘-’ for subtraction. It
is designed to help programmers read and change programs. Here is an
example; a program to calculate the distance between two points in a
plane:
-</p>
-<table><tr><td> </td><td><pre class="smallexample"> float
+ </p>
+ <table>
+ <tr>
+ <td>
+ </td>
+ <td>
+ <pre class="smallexample"> float
distance (p0, p1)
struct point p0, p1;
{
@@ -396,28 +489,46 @@ plane:
float ydist = p1.y - p0.y;
return sqrt (xdist * xdist + ydist * ydist);
}
-</pre></td></tr></table><p>Precisely what that source code means is not the
point; the point is
+</pre>
+ </td>
+ </tr>
+ </table>
+ <p>
+ Precisely what that source code means is not the point; the point is
that it looks like algebra, and a person who knows this programming
language will find it meaningful and clear. By contrast, here is same
program in executable form, on the computer I normally used when I
wrote this:
-</p>
-<table><tr><td> </td><td><pre class="smallexample"> 1314258944
-232267772 -231844864 1634862
+ </p>
+ <table>
+ <tr>
+ <td>
+ </td>
+ <td>
+ <pre class="smallexample"> 1314258944 -232267772 -231844864
1634862
1411907592 -231844736 2159150 1420296208
-234880989 -234879837 -234879966 -232295424
1644167167 -3214848 1090581031 1962942495
572518958 -803143692 1314803317
-</pre></td></tr></table><p> Source code is useful (at least potentially) to
every user of a
+</pre>
+ </td>
+ </tr>
+ </table>
+ <p>
+ Source code is useful (at least potentially) to every user of a
program. But most users are not allowed to have copies of the source
code. Usually the source code for a proprietary program is kept secret
by the owner, lest anybody else learn something from it. Users receive
only the files of incomprehensible numbers that the computer will
execute. This means that only the program’s owner can change the
program.
-</p>
-<a name="index-programmers_002c-psychosocial-harm-to-1"></a>
-<a name="index-development_002c-custom-adaptation"></a>
-<p> A friend once told me of working as a programmer in a bank for
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-programmers_002c-psychosocial-harm-to-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-development_002c-custom-adaptation">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ A friend once told me of working as a programmer in a bank for
about six months, writing a program similar to something that was
commercially available. She believed that if she could have gotten
source code for that commercially available program, it could easily
@@ -425,19 +536,23 @@ have been adapted to their needs. The bank was willing to
pay for
this, but was not permitted to—the source code was a secret. So
she had to do six months of make-work, work that counts in the GNP but
was actually waste.
-</p>
-<a name="index-MIT_002c-AI-_0028Artificial-Intelligence_0029-Lab-4"></a>
-<p> The MIT Artificial Intelligence Lab (AI Lab) received a graphics printer
as a
-gift from
-<a name="index-Xerox"></a>
-Xerox around 1977. It was run by free software to which we
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-MIT_002c-AI-_0028Artificial-Intelligence_0029-Lab-4">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The MIT Artificial Intelligence Lab (AI Lab) received a graphics printer as a
+gift from
+ <a name="index-Xerox">
+ </a>
+ Xerox around 1977. It was run by free software to which we
added many convenient features. For example, the software would
notify a user immediately on completion of a print job. Whenever the
printer had trouble, such as a paper jam or running out of paper, the
software would immediately notify all users who had print jobs
queued. These features facilitated smooth operation.
-</p>
-<p> Later Xerox gave the AI Lab a newer, faster printer, one of the first
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Later Xerox gave the AI Lab a newer, faster printer, one of the first
laser printers. It was driven by proprietary software that ran in a
separate dedicated computer, so we couldn’t add any of our favorite
features. We could arrange to send a notification when a print job was
@@ -446,45 +561,56 @@ printed (and the delay was usually considerable). There
was no way to
find out when the job was actually printed; you could only guess. And
no one was informed when there was a paper jam, so the printer often
went for an hour without being fixed.
-</p>
-<p> The system programmers at the AI Lab were capable of fixing such
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The system programmers at the AI Lab were capable of fixing such
problems, probably as capable as the original authors of the program.
Xerox was uninterested in fixing them, and chose to prevent us, so we
were forced to accept the problems. They were never fixed.
-</p>
-<p> Most good programmers have experienced this frustration. The bank
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Most good programmers have experienced this frustration. The bank
could afford to solve the problem by writing a new program from
scratch, but a typical user, no matter how skilled, can only give up.
-</p>
-<p> Giving up causes psychosocial harm—to the spirit of
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Giving up causes psychosocial harm—to the spirit of
self-reliance. It is demoralizing to live in a house that you cannot
rearrange to suit your needs. It leads to resignation and
discouragement, which can spread to affect other aspects of one’s
life. People who feel this way are unhappy and do not do good
work.
-</p>
-<p> Imagine what it would be like if recipes were hoarded in the same
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Imagine what it would be like if recipes were hoarded in the same
fashion as software. You might say, “How do I change this
recipe to take out the salt?” and the great chef would respond,
“How dare you insult my recipe, the child of my brain and my
palate, by trying to tamper with it? You don’t have the judgment to
change my recipe and make it work right!”
-</p>
-<p> “But my doctor says I’m not supposed to eat salt! What can I
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ “But my doctor says I’m not supposed to eat salt! What can I
do? Will you take out the salt for me?”
-</p>
-<p> “I would be glad to do that; my fee is only $50,000.”
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ “I would be glad to do that; my fee is only $50,000.”
Since the owner has a monopoly on changes, the fee tends to be large.
“However, right now I don’t have time. I am busy with a
commission to design a new recipe for ship’s biscuit for the Navy
Department. I might get around to you in about two years.”
-<a name="index-development_002c-custom-adaptation-1"></a>
-</p>
-<a name="Obstructing-Software-Development"></a>
-<h4 class="subsubheading"> Obstructing Software Development </h4>
-
-<a name="index-development_002c-obstruction-of"></a>
-<p> The third level of material harm affects software development.
+ <a name="index-development_002c-custom-adaptation-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <a name="Obstructing-Software-Development">
+ </a>
+ <h4 class="subsubheading">
+ Obstructing Software Development
+ </h4>
+ <a name="index-development_002c-obstruction-of">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The third level of material harm affects software development.
Software development used to be an evolutionary process, where a
person would take an existing program and rewrite parts of it for one
new feature, and then another person would rewrite parts to add
@@ -492,77 +618,106 @@ another feature; in some cases, this continued over a
period of 20
years. Meanwhile, parts of the program would be
“cannibalized” to form the beginnings of other
programs.
-</p>
-<p> The existence of owners prevents this kind of evolution, making it
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The existence of owners prevents this kind of evolution, making it
necessary to start from scratch when developing a program. It also
prevents new practitioners from studying existing programs to learn
useful techniques or even how large programs can be structured.
-</p>
-<p> Owners also obstruct education. I have met bright students in
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Owners also obstruct education. I have met bright students in
computer science who have never seen the source code of a large
program. They may be good at writing small programs, but they can’t
begin to learn the different skills of writing large ones if they can’t
see how others have done it.
-</p>
-<p>In any intellectual field, one can reach greater heights by
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ In any intellectual field, one can reach greater heights by
standing on the shoulders of others. But that is no longer generally
allowed in the software field—you can only stand on the
-shoulders of the other people <em>in your own company.</em>
-</p>
-<p>The associated psychosocial harm affects the spirit of scientific
+shoulders of the other people
+ <em>
+ in your own company.
+ </em>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The associated psychosocial harm affects the spirit of scientific
cooperation, which used to be so strong that scientists would cooperate
even when their countries were at war. In this spirit, Japanese
oceanographers abandoning their lab on an island in the Pacific
carefully preserved their work for the invading U.S. Marines, and left a
note asking them to take good care of it.
-</p>
-<p>Conflict for profit has destroyed what international conflict spared.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Conflict for profit has destroyed what international conflict spared.
Nowadays scientists in many fields don’t publish enough in their papers
to enable others to replicate the experiment. They publish only enough
to let readers marvel at how much they were able to do. This is
certainly true in computer science, where the source code for the
programs reported on is usually secret.
-<a name="index-ownership_002c-and-material-harm-3"></a>
-</p>
-<a name="It-Does-Not-Matter-How-Sharing-Is-Restricted"></a>
-<h4 class="subsubheading"> It Does Not Matter How Sharing Is Restricted </h4>
-
-<a name="index-copyright-_0028see-also-both-copyleft-and-DMCA_0029-3"></a>
-<p>I have been discussing the effects of preventing people from copying,
+ <a name="index-ownership_002c-and-material-harm-3">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <a name="It-Does-Not-Matter-How-Sharing-Is-Restricted">
+ </a>
+ <h4 class="subsubheading">
+ It Does Not Matter How Sharing Is Restricted
+ </h4>
+ <a name="index-copyright-_0028see-also-both-copyleft-and-DMCA_0029-3">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ I have been discussing the effects of preventing people from copying,
changing, and building on a program. I have not specified how this
obstruction is carried out, because that doesn’t affect the
conclusion. Whether it is done by copy protection, or copyright, or
licenses, or encryption, or ROM cards, or hardware serial numbers, if
-it <em>succeeds</em> in preventing use, it does harm.
-</p>
-<p>Users do consider some of these methods more obnoxious than others.
+it
+ <em>
+ succeeds
+ </em>
+ in preventing use, it does harm.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Users do consider some of these methods more obnoxious than others.
I suggest that the methods most hated are those that accomplish their
objective.
-</p>
-<a name="Software-Should-Be-Free"></a>
-<h4 class="subsubheading"> Software Should Be Free </h4>
-
-<a name="index-programmers_002c-psychosocial-harm-to-2"></a>
-<p>I have shown how ownership of a program—the power to restrict
+ </p>
+ <a name="Software-Should-Be-Free">
+ </a>
+ <h4 class="subsubheading">
+ Software Should Be Free
+ </h4>
+ <a name="index-programmers_002c-psychosocial-harm-to-2">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ I have shown how ownership of a program—the power to restrict
changing or copying it—is obstructive. Its negative effects are
widespread and important. It follows that society shouldn’t have
owners for programs.
-</p>
-<p>Another way to understand this is that what society needs is free
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Another way to understand this is that what society needs is free
software, and proprietary software is a poor substitute. Encouraging
the substitute is not a rational way to get what we need.
-</p>
-<a name="index-Havel_002c-Vaclav"></a>
-<p>Vaclav Havel has advised us to “Work for something because it is
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-Havel_002c-Vaclav">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Vaclav Havel has advised us to “Work for something because it is
good, not just because it stands a chance to succeed.” A business
making proprietary software stands a chance of success in its own narrow
terms, but it is not what is good for society.
-</p>
-<a name="Why-People-Will-Develop-Software"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Why People Will Develop Software </h3>
-
-<a name="index-programmers_002c-incentive-for-3"></a>
-<p>If we eliminate copyright as a means of encouraging
+ </p>
+ <a name="Why-People-Will-Develop-Software">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Why People Will Develop Software
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-programmers_002c-incentive-for-3">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ If we eliminate copyright as a means of encouraging
people to develop software, at first less software will be developed,
but that software will be more useful. It is not clear whether the
overall delivered user satisfaction will be less; but if it is, or if
@@ -570,13 +725,18 @@ we wish to increase it anyway, there are other ways to
encourage
development, just as there are ways besides toll booths to raise money
for streets. Before I talk about how that can be done, first I want to
question how much artificial encouragement is truly necessary.
-<a name="index-copyright-_0028see-also-both-copyleft-and-DMCA_0029-4"></a>
-<a name="index-development_002c-obstruction-of-1"></a>
-</p>
-<a name="Programming-Is-Fun"></a>
-<h4 class="subsubheading"> Programming Is Fun </h4>
-
-<p>There are some lines of work that few will enter except for money;
+ <a name="index-copyright-_0028see-also-both-copyleft-and-DMCA_0029-4">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-development_002c-obstruction-of-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <a name="Programming-Is-Fun">
+ </a>
+ <h4 class="subsubheading">
+ Programming Is Fun
+ </h4>
+ <p>
+ There are some lines of work that few will enter except for money;
road construction, for example. There are other fields of study and
art in which there is little chance to become rich, which people enter
for their fascination or their perceived value to society. Examples
@@ -585,8 +745,9 @@ political organizing among working people. People compete,
more sadly
than bitterly, for the few funded positions available, none of which is
funded very well. They may even pay for the chance to work in the
field, if they can afford to.
-</p>
-<p>Such a field can transform itself overnight if it begins to offer the
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Such a field can transform itself overnight if it begins to offer the
possibility of getting rich. When one worker gets rich, others demand
the same opportunity. Soon all may demand large sums of money for doing
what they used to do for pleasure. When another couple of years go by,
@@ -594,8 +755,9 @@ everyone connected with the field will deride the idea that
work would
be done in the field without large financial returns. They will advise
social planners to ensure that these returns are possible, prescribing
special privileges, powers, and monopolies as necessary to do so.
-</p>
-<p>This change happened in the field of computer programming in the
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ This change happened in the field of computer programming in the
1980s. In the 1970s, there were articles on
“computer addiction”: users were “onlining”
and had hundred-dollar-a-week habits. It was generally understood
@@ -603,43 +765,55 @@ that people frequently loved programming enough to break
up their
marriages. Today, it is generally understood that no one would
program except for a high rate of pay. People have forgotten what they
knew back then.
-</p>
-<p>When it is true at a given time that most people will work in a
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ When it is true at a given time that most people will work in a
certain field only for high pay, it need not remain true. The dynamic
of change can run in reverse, if society provides an impetus. If we
take away the possibility of great wealth, then after a while, when the
people have readjusted their attitudes, they will once again be eager
to work in the field for the joy of accomplishment.
-</p>
-<p>The question “How can we pay programmers?” becomes an
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The question “How can we pay programmers?” becomes an
easier question when we realize that it’s not a matter of paying them
a fortune. A mere living is easier to raise.
-<a name="index-programmers_002c-incentive-for-4"></a>
-</p>
-<a name="Funding-Free-Software"></a>
-<h4 class="subsubheading"> Funding Free Software </h4>
-
-<a name="index-development_002c-funding-for-4"></a>
-<a name="index-programmers_002c-income-for-8"></a>
-<p>Institutions that pay programmers do not have to be software houses.
+ <a name="index-programmers_002c-incentive-for-4">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <a name="Funding-Free-Software">
+ </a>
+ <h4 class="subsubheading">
+ Funding Free Software
+ </h4>
+ <a name="index-development_002c-funding-for-4">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-programmers_002c-income-for-8">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Institutions that pay programmers do not have to be software houses.
Many other institutions already exist that can do this.
-</p>
-<p>Hardware manufacturers find it essential to support software
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Hardware manufacturers find it essential to support software
development even if they cannot control the use of the software. In
1970, much of their software was free because they did not consider
restricting it. Today, their increasing willingness to join consortiums
shows their realization that owning the software is not what is really
important for them.
-</p>
-<a name="index-universities"></a>
-<p>Universities conduct many programming projects. Today they often
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-universities">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Universities conduct many programming projects. Today they often
sell the results, but in the 1970s they did not. Is there any doubt
that universities would develop free software if they were not allowed
to sell software? These projects could be supported by the same
government contracts and grants that now support proprietary software
development.
-</p>
-<p>It is common today for university researchers to get grants to
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ It is common today for university researchers to get grants to
develop a system, develop it nearly to the point of completion and
call that “finished,” and then start companies where they
really finish the project and make it usable. Sometimes they declare
@@ -648,20 +822,26 @@ corrupt, they instead get an exclusive license from the
university.
This is not a secret; it is openly admitted by everyone concerned.
Yet if the researchers were not exposed to the temptation to do these
things, they would still do their research.
-</p>
-<a name="index-selling_002c-software_002drelated-services"></a>
-<p>Programmers writing free software can make their living by selling
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-selling_002c-software_002drelated-services">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Programmers writing free software can make their living by selling
services related to the software. I have been hired to port the
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-C-compiler-_0028see-also-GNU_002c-GCC_0029-3"></a>
-GNU C compiler to new hardware, and
-to make user-interface extensions to GNU
-<a name="index-Emacs_002c-GNU-5"></a>
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Emacs-5"></a>
-Emacs. (I offer these improvements
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-C-compiler-_0028see-also-GNU_002c-GCC_0029-3">
+ </a>
+ GNU C compiler to new hardware, and
+to make user-interface extensions to GNU
+ <a name="index-Emacs_002c-GNU-5">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Emacs-5">
+ </a>
+ Emacs. (I offer these improvements
to the public once they are done.) I also teach classes for which I
am paid.
-</p>
-<p>I am not alone in working this way; there is now a successful,
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ I am not alone in working this way; there is now a successful,
growing corporation which does no other kind of work. Several other
companies also provide commercial support for the free software of the
GNU system. This is the beginning of the independent software support
@@ -669,10 +849,13 @@ industry—an industry that could become quite large if free
software becomes prevalent. It provides users with an option
generally unavailable for proprietary software, except to the very
wealthy.
-</p>
-<a name="index-FSF_002c-how-you-can-help-1"></a>
-<a name="index-FSF_002c-programmers"></a>
-<p>Institutions such as the Free Software Foundation can also fund
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-FSF_002c-how-you-can-help-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-FSF_002c-programmers">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Institutions such as the Free Software Foundation can also fund
programmers. Most of the Foundation’s funds come from users buying
tapes through the mail. The software on the tapes is free, which means
that every user has the freedom to copy it and change it, but many
@@ -681,88 +864,117 @@ to freedom, not to price.) Some users who already have a
copy order
tapes as a way of making a contribution they feel we deserve. The
Foundation also receives sizable donations from computer
manufacturers.
-</p>
-<p>The Free Software Foundation is a charity, and its income is spent on
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The Free Software Foundation is a charity, and its income is spent on
hiring as many programmers as possible. If it had been set up as a
business, distributing the same free software to the public for the same
fee, it would now provide a very good living for its founder.
-</p>
-<a name="index-programmers_002c-incentive-for-5"></a>
-<p>Because the Foundation is a charity, programmers often work for the
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-programmers_002c-incentive-for-5">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Because the Foundation is a charity, programmers often work for the
Foundation for half of what they could make elsewhere. They do this
because we are free of bureaucracy, and because they feel satisfaction
in knowing that their work will not be obstructed from use. Most of
all, they do it because programming is fun. In addition, volunteers
have written many useful programs for us. (Even technical writers
have begun to volunteer.)
-<a name="index-FSF_002c-how-you-can-help-2"></a>
-<a name="index-FSF_002c-programmers-1"></a>
-</p>
-<p>This confirms that programming is among the most fascinating of all
+ <a name="index-FSF_002c-how-you-can-help-2">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-FSF_002c-programmers-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ This confirms that programming is among the most fascinating of all
fields, along with music and art. We don’t have to fear that no one
will want to program.
-<a name="index-programmers_002c-income-for-9"></a>
-<a name="index-development_002c-funding-for-5"></a>
-</p>
-<a name="What-Do-Users-Owe-to-Developers_003f"></a>
-<h4 class="subsubheading"> What Do Users Owe to Developers? </h4>
-
-<a name="index-developers_002c-obligations-of-users-to"></a>
-<a name="index-developers_002c-and-creativity-and-entitlement"></a>
-<a name="index-users_002c-obligations-to-developers"></a>
-<p>There is a good reason for users of software to feel a moral
+ <a name="index-programmers_002c-income-for-9">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-development_002c-funding-for-5">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <a name="What-Do-Users-Owe-to-Developers_003f">
+ </a>
+ <h4 class="subsubheading">
+ What Do Users Owe to Developers?
+ </h4>
+ <a name="index-developers_002c-obligations-of-users-to">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-developers_002c-and-creativity-and-entitlement">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-users_002c-obligations-to-developers">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ There is a good reason for users of software to feel a moral
obligation to contribute to its support. Developers of free software
are contributing to the users’ activities, and it is both fair and in
the long-term interest of the users to give them funds to continue.
-</p>
-<p>However, this does not apply to proprietary software developers,
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ However, this does not apply to proprietary software developers,
since obstructionism deserves a punishment rather than a reward.
-</p>
-<p>We thus have a paradox: the developer of useful software is entitled
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ We thus have a paradox: the developer of useful software is entitled
to the support of the users, but any attempt to turn this moral
obligation into a requirement destroys the basis for the obligation. A
developer can either deserve a reward or demand it, but not both.
-</p>
-<p>I believe that an ethical developer faced with this paradox must act
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ I believe that an ethical developer faced with this paradox must act
so as to deserve the reward, but should also entreat the users for
voluntary donations. Eventually the users will learn to support
developers without coercion, just as they have learned to support public
radio and television stations.
-</p>
-<a name="What-Is-Software-Productivity_003f"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> What Is Software Productivity? </h3>
-
-<a name="index-programmers_002c-and-productivity"></a>
-<a name="index-productivity_002c-software"></a>
-<a name="index-software_002c-software-productivity"></a>
-<p>If software were free, there would still be programmers, but perhaps
+ </p>
+ <a name="What-Is-Software-Productivity_003f">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ What Is Software Productivity?
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-programmers_002c-and-productivity">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-productivity_002c-software">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-software_002c-software-productivity">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ If software were free, there would still be programmers, but perhaps
fewer of them. Would this be bad for society?
-</p>
-<p>Not necessarily. Today the advanced nations have fewer farmers than
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Not necessarily. Today the advanced nations have fewer farmers than
in 1900, but we do not think this is bad for society, because the few
deliver more food to the consumers than the many used to do. We call
this improved productivity. Free software would require far fewer
programmers to satisfy the demand, because of increased software
productivity at all levels:
-</p>
-<ul><li>
-Wider use of each program that is developed.
-
-</li><li>
-The ability to adapt existing programs for customization instead of starting
from scratch.
-
-</li><li>
-Better education of programmers.
-
-</li><li>
-The elimination of duplicate development effort.
-</li></ul><p>Those who object to cooperation claiming it would result in the
+ </p>
+ <ul>
+ <li>
+ Wider use of each program that is developed.
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ The ability to adapt existing programs for customization instead of
starting from scratch.
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ Better education of programmers.
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ The elimination of duplicate development effort.
+ </li>
+ </ul>
+ <p>
+ Those who object to cooperation claiming it would result in the
employment of fewer programmers are actually objecting to increased
productivity. Yet these people usually accept the widely held belief
that the software industry needs increased productivity. How is
this?
-</p>
-<p>“Software productivity” can mean two different things: the overall
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ “Software productivity” can mean two different things: the overall
productivity of all software development, or the productivity of
individual projects. Overall productivity is what society would like
to improve, and the most straightforward way to do this is to
@@ -770,64 +982,90 @@ eliminate the artificial obstacles to cooperation which
reduce it. But
researchers who study the field of “software productivity” focus
only on the second, limited, sense of the term, where improvement
requires difficult technological advances.
-<a name="index-productivity_002c-software-1"></a>
-<a name="index-programmers_002c-and-productivity-1"></a>
-<a name="index-software_002c-software-productivity-1"></a>
-</p>
-<a name="Is-Competition-Inevitable_003f"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Is Competition Inevitable? </h3>
-
-<a name="index-competition_002c-inevitability-of"></a>
-<p>Is it inevitable that people will try to compete, to surpass their
+ <a name="index-productivity_002c-software-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-programmers_002c-and-productivity-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-software_002c-software-productivity-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <a name="Is-Competition-Inevitable_003f">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Is Competition Inevitable?
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-competition_002c-inevitability-of">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Is it inevitable that people will try to compete, to surpass their
rivals in society? Perhaps it is. But competition itself is not
-harmful; the harmful thing is <em>combat.</em>
-</p>
-<p>There are many ways to compete. Competition can consist of trying
+harmful; the harmful thing is
+ <em>
+ combat.
+ </em>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ There are many ways to compete. Competition can consist of trying
to achieve ever more, to outdo what others have done. For example, in
the old days, there was competition among programming
wizards—competition for who could make the computer do the most
amazing thing, or for who could make the shortest or fastest program
for a given task. This kind of competition can benefit
-everyone, <em>as long as</em> the spirit of good sportsmanship is
+everyone,
+ <em>
+ as long as
+ </em>
+ the spirit of good sportsmanship is
maintained.
-</p>
-<p>Constructive competition is enough competition to motivate people to
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Constructive competition is enough competition to motivate people to
great efforts. A number of people are competing to be the first to have
visited all the countries on Earth; some even spend fortunes trying to
do this. But they do not bribe ship captains to strand their rivals on
desert islands. They are content to let the best person win.
-</p>
-<a name="index-citizen-values_002c-proprietary-software-and-1"></a>
-<p>Competition becomes combat when the competitors begin trying to
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-citizen-values_002c-proprietary-software-and-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Competition becomes combat when the competitors begin trying to
impede each other instead of advancing themselves—when
“Let the best person win” gives way to “Let me win,
best or not.” Proprietary software is harmful, not because it is
a form of competition, but because it is a form of combat among the
citizens of our society.
-</p>
-<p>Competition in business is not necessarily combat. For example, when
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Competition in business is not necessarily combat. For example, when
two grocery stores compete, their entire effort is to improve their own
operations, not to sabotage the rival. But this does not demonstrate a
special commitment to business ethics; rather, there is little scope for
combat in this line of business short of physical violence. Not all
areas of business share this characteristic. Withholding information
that could help everyone advance is a form of combat.
-</p>
-<p>Business ideology does not prepare people to resist the temptation to
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Business ideology does not prepare people to resist the temptation to
combat the competition. Some forms of combat have been banned with
antitrust laws, truth in advertising laws, and so on, but rather than
generalizing this to a principled rejection of combat in general,
executives invent other forms of combat which are not specifically
prohibited. Society’s resources are squandered on the economic
equivalent of factional civil war.
-</p>
-<a name="g_t_0060_0060Why-Don_0027t-You-Move-to-Russia_003f_0027_0027"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> “Why Don’t You Move to Russia?” </h3>
-
-<a name="index-Russia"></a>
-<a name="index-communism"></a>
-<a name="index-ownership_002c-fallacy-of-charge-of-communism"></a>
-<p>In the United States, any advocate of other than the most extreme
+ </p>
+ <a name="g_t_0060_0060Why-Don_0027t-You-Move-to-Russia_003f_0027_0027">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ “Why Don’t You Move to Russia?”
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-Russia">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-communism">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-ownership_002c-fallacy-of-charge-of-communism">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ In the United States, any advocate of other than the most extreme
form of laissez-faire selfishness has often heard this accusation. For
example, it is leveled against the supporters of a national health care
system, such as is found in all the other industrialized nations of the
@@ -835,93 +1073,130 @@ free world. It is leveled against the advocates of
public support for
the arts, also universal in advanced nations. The idea that citizens
have any obligation to the public good is identified in America with
Communism. But how similar are these ideas?
-</p>
-<p>Communism as was practiced in the
-<a name="index-Soviet-Union-1"></a>
-Soviet Union was a system of
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Communism as was practiced in the
+ <a name="index-Soviet-Union-1">
+ </a>
+ Soviet Union was a system of
central control where all activity was regimented, supposedly for the
common good, but actually for the sake of the members of the Communist
party. And where copying equipment was closely guarded to prevent
illegal copying.
-</p>
-<a name="index-copyright-_0028see-also-both-copyleft-and-DMCA_0029-5"></a>
-<p>The American system of software copyright exercises central control
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-copyright-_0028see-also-both-copyleft-and-DMCA_0029-5">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The American system of software copyright exercises central control
over distribution of a program, and guards copying equipment with
automatic copying-protection schemes to prevent illegal copying.
-</p>
-<p>By contrast, I am working to build a system where people are free
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ By contrast, I am working to build a system where people are free
to decide their own actions; in particular, free to help their
neighbors, and free to alter and improve the tools which they use in
their daily lives. A system based on voluntary cooperation and on
decentralization.
-</p>
-<p>Thus, if we are to judge views by their resemblance to Russian
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Thus, if we are to judge views by their resemblance to Russian
Communism, it is the software owners who are the Communists.
-</p>
-<a name="The-Question-of-Premises"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> The Question of Premises </h3>
-
-<a
name="index-users_002c-premise-of-author-supremacy-_0028see-also-ownership_0029-2"></a>
-<a name="index-Constitution_002c-premise-of-author-supremacy-and-US"></a>
-<p>I make the assumption in this paper that a user of software is no
+ </p>
+ <a name="The-Question-of-Premises">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ The Question of Premises
+ </h3>
+ <a
name="index-users_002c-premise-of-author-supremacy-_0028see-also-ownership_0029-2">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Constitution_002c-premise-of-author-supremacy-and-US">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ I make the assumption in this paper that a user of software is no
less important than an author, or even an author’s employer. In other
words, their interests and needs have equal weight, when we decide
which course of action is best.
-</p>
-<p>This premise is not universally accepted. Many maintain that an
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ This premise is not universally accepted. Many maintain that an
author’s employer is fundamentally more important than anyone else.
They say, for example, that the purpose of having owners of software
is to give the author’s employer the advantage he
deserves—regardless of how this may affect the public.
-</p>
-<p>It is no use trying to prove or disprove these premises. Proof
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ It is no use trying to prove or disprove these premises. Proof
requires shared premises. So most of what I have to say is addressed
only to those who share the premises I use, or at least are interested
in what their consequences are. For those who believe that the owners
are more important than everyone else, this paper is simply irrelevant.
-</p>
-<p>But why would a large number of Americans accept a premise that
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ But why would a large number of Americans accept a premise that
elevates certain people in importance above everyone else? Partly
because of the belief that this premise is part of the legal traditions
of American society. Some people feel that doubting the premise means
challenging the basis of society.
-</p>
-<p>It is important for these people to know that this premise is not
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ It is important for these people to know that this premise is not
part of our legal tradition. It never has been.
-</p>
-<p>Thus, the Constitution says that the purpose of copyright is to
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Thus, the Constitution says that the purpose of copyright is to
“promote the Progress of Science and the useful Arts.” The Supreme
-Court has elaborated on this, stating in <cite>Fox Film
-v. Doyal</cite><a name="DOCF26" href="#FOOT26">(26)</a> that
-<a name="index-copyright_002c-monopoly"></a>
-“The sole interest of the United States and the primary object
+Court has elaborated on this, stating in
+ <cite>
+ Fox Film
+v. Doyal
+ </cite>
+ <a href="#FOOT26" name="DOCF26">
+ (26)
+ </a>
+ that
+ <a name="index-copyright_002c-monopoly">
+ </a>
+ “The sole interest of the United States and the primary object
in conferring the [copyright] monopoly lie in the general benefits
derived by the public from the labors of authors.”
-</p>
-<p>We are not required to agree with the Constitution or the
-<a name="index-Supreme-Court_002c-US"></a>
-Supreme
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ We are not required to agree with the Constitution or the
+ <a name="index-Supreme-Court_002c-US">
+ </a>
+ Supreme
Court. (At one time, they both condoned slavery.) So their positions
do not disprove the owner supremacy premise. But I hope that the
awareness that this is a radical right-wing assumption rather than a
traditionally recognized one will weaken its appeal.
-<a
name="index-users_002c-premise-of-author-supremacy-_0028see-also-ownership_0029-3"></a>
-<a name="index-Constitution_002c-premise-of-author-supremacy-and-US-1"></a>
-</p>
-<a name="Conclusion"></a>
-<h3 class="subheading"> Conclusion </h3>
-
-<a name="index-call-to-action_002c-cooperate"></a>
-<p>We like to think that our society encourages helping your neighbor;
+ <a
name="index-users_002c-premise-of-author-supremacy-_0028see-also-ownership_0029-3">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Constitution_002c-premise-of-author-supremacy-and-US-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <a name="Conclusion">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Conclusion
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-cooperate">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ We like to think that our society encourages helping your neighbor;
but each time we reward someone for obstructionism, or admire them for
the wealth they have gained in this way, we are sending the opposite
message.
-</p>
-<a name="index-Reagan_002c-President-Ronald"></a>
-<a name="index-Cheney_002c-Dick"></a>
-<a name="index-Exxon"></a>
-<a name="index-Enron"></a>
-<p>Software hoarding is one form of our general willingness to disregard
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-Reagan_002c-President-Ronald">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Cheney_002c-Dick">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Exxon">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-Enron">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Software hoarding is one form of our general willingness to disregard
the welfare of society for personal gain. We can trace this disregard
from Ronald Reagan to Dick Cheney, from Exxon to Enron, from
failing banks to failing schools. We can measure it with the size of
@@ -929,22 +1204,39 @@ the homeless population and the prison population. The
antisocial
spirit feeds on itself, because the more we see that other people will
not help us, the more it seems futile to help them. Thus society decays
into a jungle.
-</p>
-<a name="index-citizen-values_002c-cooperation-4"></a>
-<p>If we don’t want to live in a jungle, we must change our
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-citizen-values_002c-cooperation-4">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ If we don’t want to live in a jungle, we must change our
attitudes. We must start sending the message that a good citizen is
one who cooperates when appropriate, not one who is successful at
taking from others. I hope that the free software movement will
contribute to this: at least in one area, we will replace the jungle
with a more efficient system which encourages and runs on voluntary
cooperation.
-</p><div class="footnote">
-<hr><h3>Footnotes</h3>
-<h3><a name="FOOT23" href="#DOCF23">(23)</a></h3>
-<p>The word “free” in “free software” refers to freedom, not to price; the
price paid for a copy of a free
+ </p>
+ <div class="footnote">
+ <hr>
+ <h3>
+ Footnotes
+ </h3>
+ <h3>
+ <a href="#DOCF23" name="FOOT23">
+ (23)
+ </a>
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ The word “free” in “free software” refers to freedom, not to price; the
price paid for a copy of a free
program may be zero, or small, or (rarely) quite large.
-</p><h3><a name="FOOT24" href="#DOCF24">(24)</a></h3>
-<p>The issues of pollution and traffic congestion do not
+ </p>
+ <h3>
+ <a href="#DOCF24" name="FOOT24">
+ (24)
+ </a>
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ The issues of pollution and traffic congestion do not
alter this conclusion. If we wish to make driving more expensive to
discourage driving in general, it is disadvantageous to do this using
toll booths, which contribute to both pollution and congestion. A tax
@@ -952,12 +1244,36 @@ on gasoline is much better. Likewise, a desire to
enhance safety by
limiting maximum speed is not relevant; a free-access road enhances
the average speed by avoiding stops and delays, for any given speed
limit.
-</p><h3><a name="FOOT25" href="#DOCF25">(25)</a></h3>
-<p>One might regard a particular computer program as a harmful thing that
should not be available at all, like the
-<a name="index-Lotus-Marketplace"></a>
-Lotus Marketplace database of personal information, which was withdrawn from
sale due to public disapproval. Most of what I say does not apply to this case,
but it makes little sense to argue for having an owner on the grounds that the
owner will make the program less available. The owner will not make it
<em>completely</em> unavailable, as one would wish in the case of a program
whose use is considered destructive.
-</p><h3><a name="FOOT26" href="#DOCF26">(26)</a></h3>
-<a name="index-Fox-Film-Corp_002e-v_002e-Doyal"></a>
-<p><cite>Fox Film Corp. v. Doyal,</cite> 286 US 123, 1932.
-</p></div>
-<hr size="2"></section></body></html>
+ </p>
+ <h3>
+ <a href="#DOCF25" name="FOOT25">
+ (25)
+ </a>
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ One might regard a particular computer program as a harmful thing that
should not be available at all, like the
+ <a name="index-Lotus-Marketplace">
+ </a>
+ Lotus Marketplace database of personal information, which was withdrawn
from sale due to public disapproval. Most of what I say does not apply to this
case, but it makes little sense to argue for having an owner on the grounds
that the owner will make the program less available. The owner will not make it
+ <em>
+ completely
+ </em>
+ unavailable, as one would wish in the case of a program whose use is
considered destructive.
+ </p>
+ <h3>
+ <a href="#DOCF26" name="FOOT26">
+ (26)
+ </a>
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-Fox-Film-Corp_002e-v_002e-Doyal">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ <cite>
+ Fox Film Corp. v. Doyal,
+ </cite>
+ 286 US 123, 1932.
+ </p>
+ </hr>
+ </div>
+ <hr size="2"/>
+</section>
diff --git a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_7.html
b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_7.html
index 2505cbe..56a78dc 100644
--- a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_7.html
+++ b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_7.html
@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
-<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/loose.dtd";>
-<html><!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
+<!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
Free Software Foundation
@@ -19,92 +18,87 @@ ISBN 978-0-9831592-0-9
Cover design by Rob Myers.
Cover photograph by Peter Hinely.
- --><!-- Created on February 18, 2016 by texi2html 1.82
-texi2html was written by:
- Lionel Cons <address@hidden> (original author)
- Karl Berry <address@hidden>
- Olaf Bachmann <address@hidden>
- and many others.
-Maintained by: Many creative people.
-Send bugs and suggestions to <address@hidden>
---><head><title>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 7. Why Schools Should
Exclusively Use Free Software</title><meta name="description" content="This is
the second edition of Richard Stallman's collection of essays."><meta
name="keywords" content="Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 7. Why Schools
Should Exclusively Use Free Software"><meta name="resource-type"
content="document"><meta name="distribution" content="global"><meta
name="Generator" content="texi2html 1.82"><meta http-equ [...]
-<!--
-a.summary-letter {text-decoration: none}
-blockquote.smallquotation {font-size: smaller}
-pre.display {font-family: serif}
-pre.format {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-comment {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-preformatted {font-family: serif}
-pre.smalldisplay {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallexample {font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallformat {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smalllisp {font-size: smaller}
-span.roman {font-family:serif; font-weight:normal;}
-span.sansserif {font-family:sans-serif; font-weight:normal;}
-ul.toc {list-style: none}
--->
-</style><link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
href="../static/web-common/style.css"></head><body lang="en" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
text="#000000" link="#0000FF" vlink="#800080" alink="#FF0000" class="article">
+ -->
-<a name="Schools"></a>
-<header><div id="logo"><a href="/"><img src="../static/gnu.svg" height="100"
width="100"></a></div><h1 class="book-title">Free Software, Free Society, 2nd
ed.</h1></header><section id="main"><a
name="Why-Schools-Should-Exclusively-Use-Free-Software"></a>
-<h1 class="chapter"> 7. Why Schools Should Exclusively Use Free Software </h1>
-
-<a name="index-education_002c-free-software-in-1"></a>
-<a name="index-schools_002c-free-software-in-1"></a>
-<a name="index-call-to-action_002c-use-only-free-software-in-schools"></a>
-<a name="index-users_002c-benefit-to-2"></a>
-<p>There are general reasons why all computer users should insist on
+<section id="main">
+ <a name="Why-Schools-Should-Exclusively-Use-Free-Software">
+ </a>
+ <h1 class="chapter">
+ 7. Why Schools Should Exclusively Use Free Software
+ </h1>
+ <a name="index-education_002c-free-software-in-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-schools_002c-free-software-in-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-use-only-free-software-in-schools">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-users_002c-benefit-to-2">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ There are general reasons why all computer users should insist on
free software: it gives users the freedom to control their own
computers—with proprietary software, the computer does what the
-software
-<a name="index-ownership_002c-and-users_0027-freedom-1"></a>
-owner wants it to do, not what the user wants it to
+software
+ <a name="index-ownership_002c-and-users_0027-freedom-1">
+ </a>
+ owner wants it to do, not what the user wants it to
do. Free software also gives users the freedom to cooperate with each
other, to lead an upright life. These reasons apply to schools as
they do to everyone.
-</p>
-<p>The purpose of this article is to state additional reasons that
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The purpose of this article is to state additional reasons that
apply specifically to education.
-</p>
-<p>First, free software can save schools money. Free software gives
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ First, free software can save schools money. Free software gives
schools, like other users, the freedom to copy and redistribute the
software, so the school system can make copies for all the computers
they have. In poor countries, this can help close the digital
divide.
-</p>
-<a name="index-traps_002c-donated-proprietary-software"></a>
-<p>This obvious reason, while important in practical terms, is rather
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-traps_002c-donated-proprietary-software">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ This obvious reason, while important in practical terms, is rather
shallow. And proprietary software developers can eliminate this reason
by donating copies to the schools. (Warning: a school that accepts
such an offer may have to pay for upgrades later.) So let’s look at
the deeper reasons.
-</p>
-<a name="index-citizen-values_002c-schools_0027-social-mission"></a>
-<p>Schools have a social mission: to teach students to be citizens of
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-citizen-values_002c-schools_0027-social-mission">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Schools have a social mission: to teach students to be citizens of
a strong, capable, independent, cooperating and free society. They
should promote the use of free software just as they promote
recycling. If schools teach students free software, then the students
will tend to use free software after they graduate. This will help
society as a whole escape from being dominated (and gouged) by
megacorporations.
-</p>
-<p>What schools should refuse to do is teach dependence. Those
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ What schools should refuse to do is teach dependence. Those
corporations offer free samples to schools for the same reason tobacco
companies distribute free cigarettes to minors: to get children
-addicted.<a name="DOCF27" href="#FOOT27">(27)</a>
-They will not give discounts to these students once they’ve grown up
+addicted.
+ <a href="#FOOT27" name="DOCF27">
+ (27)
+ </a>
+ They will not give discounts to these students once they’ve grown up
and graduated.
-</p>
-
-<p>Free software permits students to learn how software works. Some
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Free software permits students to learn how software works. Some
students, on reaching their teens, want to learn everything there is
to know about their computer and its software. They are intensely
curious to read the source code of the programs that they use every
day. To learn to write good code, students need to read lots of code
and write lots of code. They need to read and understand real
programs that people really use. Only free software permits this.
-</p>
-<p>Proprietary software rejects their thirst for knowledge: it says,
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Proprietary software rejects their thirst for knowledge: it says,
“The knowledge you want is a secret—learning is
forbidden!” Free software encourages everyone to learn. The free
software community rejects the “priesthood of technology,”
@@ -112,8 +106,9 @@ which keeps the general public in ignorance of how
technology works;
we encourage students of any age and situation to read the source code
and learn as much as they want to know. Schools that use free software
will enable gifted programming students to advance.
-</p>
-<p>The deepest reason for using free software in schools is for moral
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The deepest reason for using free software in schools is for moral
education. We expect schools to teach students basic facts and useful
skills, but that is not their whole job. The most fundamental job of
schools is to teach good citizenship, which includes the habit of
@@ -122,25 +117,45 @@ to share software. Schools, starting from nursery school,
should tell
their pupils, “If you bring software to school, you must share
it with the other students. And you must show the source code to the
class, in case someone wants to learn.”
-</p>
-<p>Of course, the school must practice what it preaches: all the
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Of course, the school must practice what it preaches: all the
software installed by the school should be available for students to
copy, take home, and redistribute further.
-</p>
-<p>Teaching the students to use free software, and to participate in
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Teaching the students to use free software, and to participate in
the free software community, is a hands-on civics lesson. It also
teaches students the role model of public service rather than that of
tycoons. All levels of school should use free software.
-<a name="index-schools_002c-free-software-in-2"></a>
-<a name="index-call-to-action_002c-use-only-free-software-in-schools-1"></a>
-<a name="index-users_002c-benefit-to-3"></a>
-</p>
-<div class="footnote">
-<hr><h3>Footnotes</h3>
-<h3><a name="FOOT27" href="#DOCF27">(27)</a></h3>
-<a name="index-RJ-Reynolds-Tobacco-Company"></a>
-<p>RJ Reynolds Tobacco Company was fined $15m in 2002 for handing out
+ <a name="index-schools_002c-free-software-in-2">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-use-only-free-software-in-schools-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-users_002c-benefit-to-3">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <div class="footnote">
+ <hr>
+ <h3>
+ Footnotes
+ </h3>
+ <h3>
+ <a href="#DOCF27" name="FOOT27">
+ (27)
+ </a>
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-RJ-Reynolds-Tobacco-Company">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ RJ Reynolds Tobacco Company was fined $15m in 2002 for handing out
free samples of cigarettes at events attended by children. See
-<a
href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/sci_tech/features/health/tobaccotrial/usa.htm";>http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/sci_tech/features/health/tobaccotrial/usa.htm</a>.
-</p></div>
-<hr size="2"></section></body></html>
+ <a
href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/sci_tech/features/health/tobaccotrial/usa.htm";>
+
http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/sci_tech/features/health/tobaccotrial/usa.htm
+ </a>
+ .
+ </p>
+ </hr>
+ </div>
+ <hr size="2"/>
+</section>
diff --git a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_8.html
b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_8.html
index af3b4b2..314ed36 100644
--- a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_8.html
+++ b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_8.html
@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
-<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/loose.dtd";>
-<html><!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
+<!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
Free Software Foundation
@@ -19,40 +18,22 @@ ISBN 978-0-9831592-0-9
Cover design by Rob Myers.
Cover photograph by Peter Hinely.
- --><!-- Created on February 18, 2016 by texi2html 1.82
-texi2html was written by:
- Lionel Cons <address@hidden> (original author)
- Karl Berry <address@hidden>
- Olaf Bachmann <address@hidden>
- and many others.
-Maintained by: Many creative people.
-Send bugs and suggestions to <address@hidden>
---><head><title>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 8. Releasing Free
Software If You Work at a University</title><meta name="description"
content="This is the second edition of Richard Stallman's collection of
essays."><meta name="keywords" content="Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.:
8. Releasing Free Software If You Work at a University"><meta
name="resource-type" content="document"><meta name="distribution"
content="global"><meta name="Generator" content="texi2html 1.82"><meta ht [...]
-<!--
-a.summary-letter {text-decoration: none}
-blockquote.smallquotation {font-size: smaller}
-pre.display {font-family: serif}
-pre.format {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-comment {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-preformatted {font-family: serif}
-pre.smalldisplay {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallexample {font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallformat {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smalllisp {font-size: smaller}
-span.roman {font-family:serif; font-weight:normal;}
-span.sansserif {font-family:sans-serif; font-weight:normal;}
-ul.toc {list-style: none}
--->
-</style><link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
href="../static/web-common/style.css"></head><body lang="en" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
text="#000000" link="#0000FF" vlink="#800080" alink="#FF0000" class="article">
+ -->
-<a name="University"></a>
-<header><div id="logo"><a href="/"><img src="../static/gnu.svg" height="100"
width="100"></a></div><h1 class="book-title">Free Software, Free Society, 2nd
ed.</h1></header><section id="main"><a
name="Releasing-Free-Software-If-You-Work-at-a-University"></a>
-<h1 class="chapter"> 8. Releasing Free Software If You Work at a University
</h1>
-
-<a name="index-universities_002c-releasing-free-software-at-1"></a>
-<a name="index-call-to-action_002c-release-free-software"></a>
-<a name="index-developers_002c-universities"></a>
-<p>In the free software movement, we believe computer users should have
+<section id="main">
+ <a name="Releasing-Free-Software-If-You-Work-at-a-University">
+ </a>
+ <h1 class="chapter">
+ 8. Releasing Free Software If You Work at a University
+ </h1>
+ <a name="index-universities_002c-releasing-free-software-at-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-release-free-software">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-developers_002c-universities">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ In the free software movement, we believe computer users should have
the freedom to change and redistribute the software that they use.
The “free” in “free software” refers to freedom: it means
users have the freedom to run, modify and redistribute the software.
@@ -60,56 +41,69 @@ Free software contributes to human knowledge, while nonfree
software
does not. Universities should therefore encourage free software for
the sake of advancing human knowledge, just as they should encourage
scientists and other scholars to publish their work.
-</p>
-<p>Alas, many university administrators have a grasping attitude towards
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Alas, many university administrators have a grasping attitude towards
software (and towards science); they see programs as opportunities for
income, not as opportunities to contribute to human knowledge. Free
software developers have been coping with this tendency for almost 20
years.
-</p>
-<p>When I started developing the
-<a name="index-GNU-_0028see-also-both-software-and-GNU_0029-2"></a>
-GNU operating system, in 1984, my first step was to quit my job at
-<a name="index-MIT-4"></a>
-MIT.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ When I started developing the
+ <a name="index-GNU-_0028see-also-both-software-and-GNU_0029-2">
+ </a>
+ GNU operating system, in 1984, my first step was to quit my job at
+ <a name="index-MIT-4">
+ </a>
+ MIT.
I did this specifically so that the MIT licensing office would be
unable to interfere with releasing GNU as free software. I had
planned an approach for licensing the programs in GNU that would ensure
that all modified versions must be free software as well—an approach
that developed into the GNU General Public License (GNU GPL)—and I did not
want to have to beg the MIT administration to let me use it.
-</p>
-<p>Over the years, university affiliates have often come to the
-<a name="index-FSF_002c-universities"></a>
-Free
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Over the years, university affiliates have often come to the
+ <a name="index-FSF_002c-universities">
+ </a>
+ Free
Software Foundation for advice on how to cope with administrators who
see software only as something to sell. One good method, applicable
even for specifically funded projects, is to base your work on an
-existing program that was released under the
-<a name="index-GPL_002c-universities-and"></a>
-GNU GPL. Then you can
+existing program that was released under the
+ <a name="index-GPL_002c-universities-and">
+ </a>
+ GNU GPL. Then you can
tell the administrators, “We’re not allowed to release the
modified version except under the GNU GPL—any other way would
be copyright infringement.” After the dollar signs fade from
their eyes, they will usually consent to releasing it as free
software.
-</p>
-<p>You can also ask your funding sponsor for help. When a group at
-<a name="index-NYU"></a>
-NYU
-developed the
-<a name="index-Ada-compiler_002c-GNU"></a>
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Ada-compiler"></a>
-GNU Ada Compiler, with funding from the
-<a name="index-Air-Force_002c-US-1"></a>
-US Air Force,
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ You can also ask your funding sponsor for help. When a group at
+ <a name="index-NYU">
+ </a>
+ NYU
+developed the
+ <a name="index-Ada-compiler_002c-GNU">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Ada-compiler">
+ </a>
+ GNU Ada Compiler, with funding from the
+ <a name="index-Air-Force_002c-US-1">
+ </a>
+ US Air Force,
the contract explicitly called for donating the resulting code to the
Free Software Foundation. Work out the arrangement with the sponsor
first, then politely show the university administration that it is not
open to renegotiation. They would rather have a contract to develop
free software than no contract at all, so they will most likely go
along.
-</p>
-<p>Whatever you do, raise the issue early—well before the
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Whatever you do, raise the issue early—well before the
program is half finished. At this point, the university still needs
you, so you can play hardball: tell the administration you will finish
the program, make it usable, if they agree in writing to make it
@@ -119,52 +113,65 @@ and never make a version good enough to release. When the
administrators know their choice is to have a free software package
that brings credit to the university or nothing at all, they will
usually choose the former.
-</p>
-<p>Not all universities have grasping policies. The
-<a name="index-University-of-Texas"></a>
-University of Texas
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Not all universities have grasping policies. The
+ <a name="index-University-of-Texas">
+ </a>
+ University of Texas
has a policy that makes it easy to release software developed there as
-free software under the GNU General Public License.
-<a name="index-Univates"></a>
-Univates, in
-<a name="index-Brazil"></a>
-Brazil, and the
-<a name="index-International-Institute-of-Information-Technology"></a>
-International Institute of Information Technology in
-Hyderabad,
-<a name="index-India"></a>
-India, both have policies in favor of releasing software
+free software under the GNU General Public License.
+ <a name="index-Univates">
+ </a>
+ Univates, in
+ <a name="index-Brazil">
+ </a>
+ Brazil, and the
+ <a name="index-International-Institute-of-Information-Technology">
+ </a>
+ International Institute of Information Technology in
+Hyderabad,
+ <a name="index-India">
+ </a>
+ India, both have policies in favor of releasing software
under the GPL. By developing faculty support first, you may be able
to institute such a policy at your university. Present the issue as
one of principle: does the university have a mission to advance human
knowledge, or is its sole purpose to perpetuate itself?
-<a name="index-GPL_002c-universities-and-1"></a>
-</p>
-<p>Whatever approach you use, it helps to approach the issue with determination
+ <a name="index-GPL_002c-universities-and-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Whatever approach you use, it helps to approach the issue with determination
and based on an
ethical perspective, as we do in the free software movement. To treat
the public ethically, the software should be free—as in
freedom—for the whole public.
-</p>
-<a name="index-developers_002c-solid-values-for-free-software"></a>
-<p>Many developers of free software profess narrowly practical reasons
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-developers_002c-solid-values-for-free-software">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Many developers of free software profess narrowly practical reasons
for doing so: they advocate allowing others to share and change
software as an expedient for making software powerful and reliable.
If those values motivate you to develop free software, well and good,
and thank you for your contribution. But those values do not give you
a good footing to stand firm when university administrators pressure
or tempt you to make the program nonfree.
-</p>
-<p>For instance, they may argue that “We could make it even more
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ For instance, they may argue that “We could make it even more
powerful and reliable with all the money we can get.” This claim
may or may not come true in the end, but it is hard to disprove in
advance. They may suggest a license to offer copies “free of
charge, for academic use only,” which would tell the general
public they don’t deserve freedom, and argue that this will obtain the
cooperation of academia, which is all (they say) you need.
-</p>
-<a name="index-citizen-values_002c-convenience-v_002e-2"></a>
-<p>If you start from values of convenience alone, it is hard to make a
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-citizen-values_002c-convenience-v_002e-2">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ If you start from values of convenience alone, it is hard to make a
good case for rejecting these dead-end proposals, but you can do it
easily if you base your stand on ethical and political values. What
good is it to make a program powerful and reliable at the expense of
@@ -172,11 +179,18 @@ users’ freedom? Shouldn’t freedom apply outside academia
as well as
within it? The answers are obvious if freedom and community are among
your goals. Free software respects the users’ freedom, while nonfree
software negates it.
-</p>
-<p>Nothing strengthens your resolve like knowing that the community’s
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Nothing strengthens your resolve like knowing that the community’s
freedom depends, in one instance, on you.
-<a name="index-universities_002c-releasing-free-software-at-2"></a>
-<a name="index-education_002c-free-software-in-2"></a>
-<a name="index-call-to-action_002c-release-free-software-1"></a>
-<a name="index-developers_002c-universities-1"></a>
-</p><hr size="2"></section></body></html>
+ <a name="index-universities_002c-releasing-free-software-at-2">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-education_002c-free-software-in-2">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-release-free-software-1">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-developers_002c-universities-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <hr size="2"/>
+</section>
diff --git a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_9.html
b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_9.html
index f3058a0..03e91ef 100644
--- a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_9.html
+++ b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_9.html
@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
-<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/loose.dtd";>
-<html><!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
+<!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
Free Software Foundation
@@ -19,99 +18,94 @@ ISBN 978-0-9831592-0-9
Cover design by Rob Myers.
Cover photograph by Peter Hinely.
- --><!-- Created on February 18, 2016 by texi2html 1.82
-texi2html was written by:
- Lionel Cons <address@hidden> (original author)
- Karl Berry <address@hidden>
- Olaf Bachmann <address@hidden>
- and many others.
-Maintained by: Many creative people.
-Send bugs and suggestions to <address@hidden>
---><head><title>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 9. Why Free Software
Needs Free Documentation</title><meta name="description" content="This is the
second edition of Richard Stallman's collection of essays."><meta
name="keywords" content="Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 9. Why Free
Software Needs Free Documentation"><meta name="resource-type"
content="document"><meta name="distribution" content="global"><meta
name="Generator" content="texi2html 1.82"><meta http-equiv="Content- [...]
-<!--
-a.summary-letter {text-decoration: none}
-blockquote.smallquotation {font-size: smaller}
-pre.display {font-family: serif}
-pre.format {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-comment {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-preformatted {font-family: serif}
-pre.smalldisplay {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallexample {font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallformat {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smalllisp {font-size: smaller}
-span.roman {font-family:serif; font-weight:normal;}
-span.sansserif {font-family:sans-serif; font-weight:normal;}
-ul.toc {list-style: none}
--->
-</style><link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
href="../static/web-common/style.css"></head><body lang="en" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
text="#000000" link="#0000FF" vlink="#800080" alink="#FF0000" class="article">
+ -->
-<a name="Free-Doc"></a>
-<header><div id="logo"><a href="/"><img src="../static/gnu.svg" height="100"
width="100"></a></div><h1 class="book-title">Free Software, Free Society, 2nd
ed.</h1></header><section id="main"><a
name="Why-Free-Software-Needs-Free-Documentation"></a>
-<h1 class="chapter"> 9. Why Free Software Needs Free Documentation </h1>
-
-<a name="index-documentation-_0028see-also-both-FDL-and-manuals_0029-2"></a>
-<a
name="index-manuals-_0028see-also-manuals_002c-FDL_002c-and-documentation_0029-1"></a>
-<p>The biggest deficiency in free operating systems is not in the
+<section id="main">
+ <a name="Why-Free-Software-Needs-Free-Documentation">
+ </a>
+ <h1 class="chapter">
+ 9. Why Free Software Needs Free Documentation
+ </h1>
+ <a name="index-documentation-_0028see-also-both-FDL-and-manuals_0029-2">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-manuals-_0028see-also-manuals_002c-FDL_002c-and-documentation_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The biggest deficiency in free operating systems is not in the
software—it is the lack of good free manuals that we can include
in these systems. Many of our most important programs do not come
with full manuals. Documentation is an essential part of any software
package; when an important free software package does not come with a
free manual, that is a major gap. We have many such gaps today.
-</p>
-<a name="index-Perl"></a>
-<p>Once upon a time, many years ago, I thought I would learn Perl. I got
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-Perl">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Once upon a time, many years ago, I thought I would learn Perl. I got
a copy of a free manual, but I found it hard to read. When I asked
Perl users about alternatives, they told me that there were better
introductory manuals—but those were not free.
-</p>
-<p>Why was this? The authors of the good manuals had written them for
-<a name="index-O_0027Reilly-Associates"></a>
-O’Reilly Associates, which published them with restrictive
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Why was this? The authors of the good manuals had written them for
+ <a name="index-O_0027Reilly-Associates">
+ </a>
+ O’Reilly Associates, which published them with restrictive
terms—no copying, no modification, source files not
available—which exclude them from the free software
community.
-</p>
-<p>That wasn’t the first time this sort of thing has happened, and (to
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ That wasn’t the first time this sort of thing has happened, and (to
our community’s great loss) it was far from the last. Proprietary
manual publishers have enticed a great many authors to restrict their
manuals since then. Many times I have heard a GNU user eagerly tell
me about a manual that he is writing, with which he expects to help
-the
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Project-3"></a>
-GNU Project—and then had my hopes dashed, as he proceeded to
+the
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Project-3">
+ </a>
+ GNU Project—and then had my hopes dashed, as he proceeded to
explain that he had signed a contract with a publisher that would
restrict it so that we cannot use it.
-</p>
-<p>Given that writing good English is a rare skill among programmers, we
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Given that writing good English is a rare skill among programmers, we
can ill afford to lose manuals this way.
-</p>
-<p>Free documentation, like free software, is a matter of freedom, not
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Free documentation, like free software, is a matter of freedom, not
price. The problem with these manuals was not that O’Reilly
Associates charged a price for printed copies—that in itself is
-fine. (The
-<a name="index-FSF_002c-and-selling-GNU-manuals"></a>
-<a name="index-manuals_002c-GNU"></a>
-<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-manuals"></a>
-Free Software Foundation sells printed
+fine. (The
+ <a name="index-FSF_002c-and-selling-GNU-manuals">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-manuals_002c-GNU">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-manuals">
+ </a>
+ Free Software Foundation sells printed
copies of free GNU manuals, too.) But
GNU manuals are available in source code form, while these manuals are
available only on paper. GNU manuals come with permission to copy and
modify; the Perl manuals do not. These restrictions are the problems.
-</p>
-<p>The criterion for a free manual is pretty much the same as for free
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The criterion for a free manual is pretty much the same as for free
software: it is a matter of giving all users certain freedoms.
Redistribution (including commercial redistribution) must be
permitted, so that the manual can accompany every copy of the program,
on line or on paper. Permission for modification is crucial too.
-</p>
-<p>As a general rule, I don’t believe that it is essential for people to
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ As a general rule, I don’t believe that it is essential for people to
have permission to modify all sorts of articles and books. The issues
for writings are not necessarily the same as those for software. For
example, I don’t think you or I are obliged to give permission to
modify articles like this one, which describe our actions and our
views.
-</p>
-<p>But there is a particular reason why the freedom to modify is crucial
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ But there is a particular reason why the freedom to modify is crucial
for documentation for free software. When people exercise their right
to modify the software, and add or change its features, if they are
conscientious they will change the manual too—so they can provide
@@ -119,8 +113,9 @@ accurate and usable documentation with the modified
program. A manual
which forbids programmers from being conscientious and finishing the job, or
more precisely requires them to write a new manual from scratch if
they change the program, does not fill our community’s needs.
-</p>
-<p>While a blanket prohibition on modification is unacceptable, some
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ While a blanket prohibition on modification is unacceptable, some
kinds of limits on the method of modification pose no problem. For
example, requirements to preserve the original author’s copyright
notice, the distribution terms, or the list of authors, are OK. It is
@@ -128,50 +123,69 @@ also no problem to require modified versions to include
notice that
they were modified, even to have entire sections that may not be
deleted or changed, as long as these sections deal with nontechnical
topics. (Some GNU manuals have them.)
-</p>
-<p>These kinds of restrictions are not a problem because, as a practical
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ These kinds of restrictions are not a problem because, as a practical
matter, they don’t stop the conscientious programmer from adapting the
manual to fit the modified program. In other words, they don’t block
the free software community from making full use of the manual.
-</p>
-<p>However, it must be possible to modify all the <em>technical</em>
-content of the manual, and then distribute the result through all the usual
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ However, it must be possible to modify all the
+ <em>
+ technical
+ </em>
+ content of the manual, and then distribute the result through all the usual
media, through all the usual channels; otherwise, the restrictions do
block the community, the manual is not free, and so we need another
manual.
-</p>
-<p>Unfortunately, it is often hard to find someone to write another
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Unfortunately, it is often hard to find someone to write another
manual when a proprietary manual exists. The obstacle is that many
users think that a proprietary manual is good enough—so they
don’t see the need to write a free manual. They do not see that the
free operating system has a gap that needs filling.
-</p>
-<p>Why do users think that proprietary manuals are good enough? Some
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Why do users think that proprietary manuals are good enough? Some
have not considered the issue. I hope this article will do something
to change that.
-</p>
-<a name="index-citizen-values_002c-proprietary-manuals"></a>
-<p>Other users consider proprietary manuals acceptable for the same
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-citizen-values_002c-proprietary-manuals">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Other users consider proprietary manuals acceptable for the same
reason so many people consider proprietary software acceptable: they
judge in purely practical terms, not using freedom as a criterion.
These people are entitled to their opinions, but since those opinions
spring from values which do not include freedom, they are no guide for
those of us who do value freedom.
-</p>
-<a name="index-call-to-action_002c-promote-free-documentation"></a>
-<p>Please spread the word about this issue. We continue to lose manuals
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-promote-free-documentation">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Please spread the word about this issue. We continue to lose manuals
to proprietary publishing. If we spread the word that proprietary
manuals are not sufficient, perhaps the next person who wants to help
GNU by writing documentation will realize, before it is too late, that
he must above all make it free.
-</p>
-<p>We can also encourage commercial publishers to sell free, copylefted
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ We can also encourage commercial publishers to sell free, copylefted
manuals instead of proprietary ones. One way you can help this is to
check the distribution terms of a manual before you buy it, and
prefer copylefted manuals to noncopylefted ones.
-</p>
-<p><b>Note:</b>
-We maintain a page that lists free books available from other publishers.
-<a name="index-documentation-_0028see-also-both-FDL-and-manuals_0029-3"></a>
-<a
name="index-manuals-_0028see-also-manuals_002c-FDL_002c-and-documentation_0029-2"></a>
-</p><hr size="2"></section></body></html>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ <b>
+ Note:
+ </b>
+ We maintain a page that lists free books available from other publishers.
+ <a name="index-documentation-_0028see-also-both-FDL-and-manuals_0029-3">
+ </a>
+ <a
name="index-manuals-_0028see-also-manuals_002c-FDL_002c-and-documentation_0029-2">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <hr size="2"/>
+</section>
diff --git a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_U.0.html
b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_U.0.html
index 071b39f..60a19e4 100644
--- a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_U.0.html
+++ b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_U.0.html
@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
-<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/loose.dtd";>
-<html><!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
+<!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
Free Software Foundation
@@ -19,95 +18,116 @@ ISBN 978-0-9831592-0-9
Cover design by Rob Myers.
Cover photograph by Peter Hinely.
- --><!-- Created on February 18, 2016 by texi2html 1.82
-texi2html was written by:
- Lionel Cons <address@hidden> (original author)
- Karl Berry <address@hidden>
- Olaf Bachmann <address@hidden>
- and many others.
-Maintained by: Many creative people.
-Send bugs and suggestions to <address@hidden>
---><head><title>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: Foreword</title><meta
name="description" content="This is the second edition of Richard Stallman's
collection of essays."><meta name="keywords" content="Free Software, Free
Society, 2nd ed.: Foreword"><meta name="resource-type" content="document"><meta
name="distribution" content="global"><meta name="Generator" content="texi2html
1.82"><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><style
type="text/css">
-<!--
-a.summary-letter {text-decoration: none}
-blockquote.smallquotation {font-size: smaller}
-pre.display {font-family: serif}
-pre.format {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-comment {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-preformatted {font-family: serif}
-pre.smalldisplay {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallexample {font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallformat {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smalllisp {font-size: smaller}
-span.roman {font-family:serif; font-weight:normal;}
-span.sansserif {font-family:sans-serif; font-weight:normal;}
-ul.toc {list-style: none}
--->
-</style><link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
href="../static/web-common/style.css"></head><body lang="en" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
text="#000000" link="#0000FF" vlink="#800080" alink="#FF0000" class="article">
+ -->
-<a name="Foreword"></a>
-<header><div id="logo"><a href="/"><img src="../static/gnu.svg" height="100"
width="100"></a></div><h1 class="book-title">Free Software, Free Society, 2nd
ed.</h1></header><section id="main"><a name="Foreword-1"></a>
-<h1 class="unnumbered"> Foreword </h1>
-
-<p>Every generation has its philosopher—a writer or an artist who captures the
imagination of a time. Sometimes these philosophers are recognized as such;
often it takes generations before the connection is made real. But recognized
or not, a time gets marked by the people who speak its ideals, whether in the
whisper of a poem, or the blast of a political movement.
-</p>
-<a name="index-Stallman_002c-Richard"></a>
-<p>Our generation has a philosopher. He is not an artist, or a professional
writer. He is a programmer. Richard Stallman began his work in the labs of
-<a name="index-MIT"></a>
-MIT, as a programmer and architect building operating system software. He has
built his career on a stage of public life, as a programmer and an architect
founding a movement for freedom in a world increasingly defined by “code.”
-</p>
-<p>“Code” is the technology that makes computers run. Whether inscribed in
software or burned in hardware, it is the collection of instructions, first
written in words, that directs the functionality of machines. These
machines—computers—increasingly define and control our life. They determine how
phones connect, and what runs on TV. They decide whether video can be streamed
across a broadband link to a computer. They control what a computer reports
back to its manufacturer. These machin [...]
-</p>
-<p>What control should we have over this code? What understanding? What
freedom should there be to match the control it enables? What power?
-</p>
-<p>These questions have been the challenge of Stallman’s life. Through his
works and his words, he has pushed us to see the importance of keeping code
“free.” Not free in the sense that code writers don’t get paid, but free in the
sense that the control coders build be transparent to all, and that anyone have
the right to take that control, and modify it as he or she sees fit. This is
“free software”; “free software” is one answer to a world built in code.
-</p>
-<p>“Free.” Stallman laments the ambiguity in his own term. There’s nothing to
lament. Puzzles force people to think, and this term “free” does this puzzling
work quite well. To modern American ears, “free software” sounds utopian,
impossible. Nothing, not even lunch, is free. How could the most important
words running the most critical machines running the world be “free.” How could
a sane society aspire to such an ideal?
-</p>
-<p>Yet the odd clink of the word “free” is a function of us, not of the term.
“Free” has different senses, only one of which refers to “price.” A much more
fundamental sense of “free” is the “free,” Stallman says, in the term “free
speech,” or perhaps better in the term “free labor.” Not free as in costless,
but free as in limited in its control by others. Free software is control that
is transparent, and open to change, just as free laws, or the laws of a “free
society,” are free when t [...]
-</p>
-<a name="index-copyleft-_0028see-also-copyright_0029"></a>
-<p>The mechanism of this rendering is an extraordinarily clever device called
“copyleft” implemented through a license called
-<a name="index-GPL_002c-introduction-to"></a>
-GPL. Using the power of copyright law, “free software” not only assures that
it remains open, and subject to change, but that other software that takes and
uses “free software” (and that technically counts as a “derivative”) must also
itself be free. If you use and adapt a free software program, and then release
that adapted version to the public, the released version must be as free as the
version it was adapted from. It must, or the law of copyright will be violated.
-</p>
-<a name="index-Microsoft_002c-war-on-GPL"></a>
-<p>“Free software,” like free societies, has its enemies. Microsoft has waged
a war against the GPL, warning whoever will listen that the GPL is a
“dangerous” license. The dangers it names, however, are largely illusory.
Others object to the “coercion” in GPL’s insistence that modified versions are
also free. But a condition is not coercion. If it is not coercion for Microsoft
to refuse to permit users to distribute modified versions of its product Office
without paying it (presumably) m [...]
-</p>
-<p>And then there are those who call Stallman’s message too extreme. But
extreme it is not. Indeed, in an obvious sense, Stallman’s work is a simple
translation of the freedoms that our tradition crafted in the world before
code. “Free software” would assure that the world governed by code is as “free”
as our tradition that built the world before code.
-</p>
-<p>For example: A “free society” is regulated by law. But there are limits
that any free society places on this regulation through law: No society that
kept its laws secret could ever be called free. No government that hid its
regulations from the regulated could ever stand in our tradition. Law controls.
But it does so justly only when visibly. And law is visible only when its terms
are knowable and controllable by those it regulates, or by the agents of those
it regulates (lawyers, leg [...]
-</p>
-<p>This condition on law extends beyond the work of a legislature. Think about
the practice of law in American courts. Lawyers are hired by their clients to
advance their clients’ interests. Sometimes that interest is advanced through
litigation. In the course of this litigation, lawyers write briefs. These
briefs in turn affect opinions written by judges. These opinions decide who
wins a particular case, or whether a certain law can stand consistently with a
constitution.
-</p>
-<p>All the material in this process is free in the sense that Stallman means.
Legal briefs are open and free for others to use. The arguments are transparent
(which is different from saying they are good) and the reasoning can be taken
without the permission of the original lawyers. The opinions they produce can
be quoted in later briefs. They can be copied and integrated into another brief
or opinion. The “source code” for American law is by design, and by principle,
open and free for a [...]
-</p>
-<p>This economy of free code (and here I mean free legal code) doesn’t starve
lawyers. Law firms have enough incentive to produce great briefs even though
the stuff they build can be taken and copied by anyone else. The lawyer is a
craftsman; his or her product is public. Yet the crafting is not charity.
Lawyers get paid; the public doesn’t demand such work without price. Instead
this economy flourishes, with later work added to the earlier.
-</p>
-<p>We could imagine a legal practice that was different—briefs and arguments
that were kept secret; rulings that announced a result but not the reasoning.
Laws that were kept by the police but published to no one else. Regulation that
operated without explaining its rule.
-</p>
-<p>We could imagine this society, but we could not imagine calling it “free.”
Whether or not the incentives in such a society would be better or more
efficiently allocated, such a society could not be known as free. The ideals of
freedom, of life within a free society, demand more than efficient application.
Instead, openness and transparency are the constraints within which a legal
system gets built, not options to be added if convenient to the leaders. Life
governed by software code sh [...]
-</p>
-<p>Code writing is not litigation. It is better, richer, more productive. But
the law is an obvious instance of how creativity and incentives do not depend
upon perfect control over the products created. Like jazz, or novels, or
architecture, the law gets built upon the work that went before. This adding
and changing is what creativity always is. And a free society is one that
assures that its most important resources remain free in just this sense.
-</p>
-<p>This book collects the writing of Richard Stallman in a manner that will
make its subtlety and power clear. The essays span a wide range, from copyright
to the history of the free software movement. They include many arguments not
well known, and among these, an especially insightful account of the changed
circumstances that render copyright in the digital world suspect. They will
serve as a resource for those who seek to understand the thought of this most
powerful man—powerful in hi [...]
-</p>
-<p>I don’t know Stallman well. I know him well enough to know he is a hard man
to like. He is driven, often impatient. His anger can flare at friend as easily
as foe. He is uncompromising and persistent; patient in both.
-</p>
-<p>Yet when our world finally comes to understand the power and danger of
code—when it finally sees that code, like laws, or like government, must be
transparent to be free—then we will look back at this uncompromising and
persistent programmer and recognize the vision he has fought to make real: the
vision of a world where freedom and knowledge survives the compiler. And we
will come to see that no man, through his deeds or words, has done as much to
make possible the freedom that this [...]
-</p>
-<p>We have not earned that freedom yet. We may well fail in securing it. But
whether we succeed or fail, in these essays is a picture of what that freedom
could be. And in the life that produced these words and works, there is
inspiration for anyone who would, like Stallman, fight to create this freedom.
-</p>
-<a name="index-Lessig_002c-Lawrence"></a>
-<p align="right"><small>LAWRENCE LESSIG</small>
-</p>
-<p>
-Lawrence Lessig is a Professor of Law at Harvard Law
-School, the director of the<br> Edmond J. Safra Foundation Center
-for Ethics, and the founder of Stanford Law<br> School’s Center for
-Internet and Society. For much of his career, he focused his<br> work on
+<section id="main">
+ <a name="Foreword-1">
+ </a>
+ <h1 class="unnumbered">
+ Foreword
+ </h1>
+ <p>
+ Every generation has its philosopher—a writer or an artist who captures the
imagination of a time. Sometimes these philosophers are recognized as such;
often it takes generations before the connection is made real. But recognized
or not, a time gets marked by the people who speak its ideals, whether in the
whisper of a poem, or the blast of a political movement.
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-Stallman_002c-Richard">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Our generation has a philosopher. He is not an artist, or a professional
writer. He is a programmer. Richard Stallman began his work in the labs of
+ <a name="index-MIT">
+ </a>
+ MIT, as a programmer and architect building operating system software. He
has built his career on a stage of public life, as a programmer and an
architect founding a movement for freedom in a world increasingly defined by
“code.”
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ “Code” is the technology that makes computers run. Whether inscribed in
software or burned in hardware, it is the collection of instructions, first
written in words, that directs the functionality of machines. These
machines—computers—increasingly define and control our life. They determine how
phones connect, and what runs on TV. They decide whether video can be streamed
across a broadband link to a computer. They control what a computer reports
back to its manufacturer. These machine [...]
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ What control should we have over this code? What understanding? What freedom
should there be to match the control it enables? What power?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ These questions have been the challenge of Stallman’s life. Through his
works and his words, he has pushed us to see the importance of keeping code
“free.” Not free in the sense that code writers don’t get paid, but free in the
sense that the control coders build be transparent to all, and that anyone have
the right to take that control, and modify it as he or she sees fit. This is
“free software”; “free software” is one answer to a world built in code.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ “Free.” Stallman laments the ambiguity in his own term. There’s nothing to
lament. Puzzles force people to think, and this term “free” does this puzzling
work quite well. To modern American ears, “free software” sounds utopian,
impossible. Nothing, not even lunch, is free. How could the most important
words running the most critical machines running the world be “free.” How could
a sane society aspire to such an ideal?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Yet the odd clink of the word “free” is a function of us, not of the term.
“Free” has different senses, only one of which refers to “price.” A much more
fundamental sense of “free” is the “free,” Stallman says, in the term “free
speech,” or perhaps better in the term “free labor.” Not free as in costless,
but free as in limited in its control by others. Free software is control that
is transparent, and open to change, just as free laws, or the laws of a “free
society,” are free when th [...]
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-copyleft-_0028see-also-copyright_0029">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ The mechanism of this rendering is an extraordinarily clever device called
“copyleft” implemented through a license called
+ <a name="index-GPL_002c-introduction-to">
+ </a>
+ GPL. Using the power of copyright law, “free software” not only assures that
it remains open, and subject to change, but that other software that takes and
uses “free software” (and that technically counts as a “derivative”) must also
itself be free. If you use and adapt a free software program, and then release
that adapted version to the public, the released version must be as free as the
version it was adapted from. It must, or the law of copyright will be violated.
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-Microsoft_002c-war-on-GPL">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ “Free software,” like free societies, has its enemies. Microsoft has waged a
war against the GPL, warning whoever will listen that the GPL is a “dangerous”
license. The dangers it names, however, are largely illusory. Others object to
the “coercion” in GPL’s insistence that modified versions are also free. But a
condition is not coercion. If it is not coercion for Microsoft to refuse to
permit users to distribute modified versions of its product Office without
paying it (presumably) mi [...]
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And then there are those who call Stallman’s message too extreme. But
extreme it is not. Indeed, in an obvious sense, Stallman’s work is a simple
translation of the freedoms that our tradition crafted in the world before
code. “Free software” would assure that the world governed by code is as “free”
as our tradition that built the world before code.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ For example: A “free society” is regulated by law. But there are limits that
any free society places on this regulation through law: No society that kept
its laws secret could ever be called free. No government that hid its
regulations from the regulated could ever stand in our tradition. Law controls.
But it does so justly only when visibly. And law is visible only when its terms
are knowable and controllable by those it regulates, or by the agents of those
it regulates (lawyers, legi [...]
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ This condition on law extends beyond the work of a legislature. Think about
the practice of law in American courts. Lawyers are hired by their clients to
advance their clients’ interests. Sometimes that interest is advanced through
litigation. In the course of this litigation, lawyers write briefs. These
briefs in turn affect opinions written by judges. These opinions decide who
wins a particular case, or whether a certain law can stand consistently with a
constitution.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ All the material in this process is free in the sense that Stallman means.
Legal briefs are open and free for others to use. The arguments are transparent
(which is different from saying they are good) and the reasoning can be taken
without the permission of the original lawyers. The opinions they produce can
be quoted in later briefs. They can be copied and integrated into another brief
or opinion. The “source code” for American law is by design, and by principle,
open and free for an [...]
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ This economy of free code (and here I mean free legal code) doesn’t starve
lawyers. Law firms have enough incentive to produce great briefs even though
the stuff they build can be taken and copied by anyone else. The lawyer is a
craftsman; his or her product is public. Yet the crafting is not charity.
Lawyers get paid; the public doesn’t demand such work without price. Instead
this economy flourishes, with later work added to the earlier.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ We could imagine a legal practice that was different—briefs and arguments
that were kept secret; rulings that announced a result but not the reasoning.
Laws that were kept by the police but published to no one else. Regulation that
operated without explaining its rule.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ We could imagine this society, but we could not imagine calling it “free.”
Whether or not the incentives in such a society would be better or more
efficiently allocated, such a society could not be known as free. The ideals of
freedom, of life within a free society, demand more than efficient application.
Instead, openness and transparency are the constraints within which a legal
system gets built, not options to be added if convenient to the leaders. Life
governed by software code sho [...]
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Code writing is not litigation. It is better, richer, more productive. But
the law is an obvious instance of how creativity and incentives do not depend
upon perfect control over the products created. Like jazz, or novels, or
architecture, the law gets built upon the work that went before. This adding
and changing is what creativity always is. And a free society is one that
assures that its most important resources remain free in just this sense.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ This book collects the writing of Richard Stallman in a manner that will
make its subtlety and power clear. The essays span a wide range, from copyright
to the history of the free software movement. They include many arguments not
well known, and among these, an especially insightful account of the changed
circumstances that render copyright in the digital world suspect. They will
serve as a resource for those who seek to understand the thought of this most
powerful man—powerful in his [...]
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ I don’t know Stallman well. I know him well enough to know he is a hard man
to like. He is driven, often impatient. His anger can flare at friend as easily
as foe. He is uncompromising and persistent; patient in both.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Yet when our world finally comes to understand the power and danger of
code—when it finally sees that code, like laws, or like government, must be
transparent to be free—then we will look back at this uncompromising and
persistent programmer and recognize the vision he has fought to make real: the
vision of a world where freedom and knowledge survives the compiler. And we
will come to see that no man, through his deeds or words, has done as much to
make possible the freedom that this n [...]
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ We have not earned that freedom yet. We may well fail in securing it. But
whether we succeed or fail, in these essays is a picture of what that freedom
could be. And in the life that produced these words and works, there is
inspiration for anyone who would, like Stallman, fight to create this freedom.
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-Lessig_002c-Lawrence">
+ </a>
+ <p align="right">
+ <small>
+ LAWRENCE LESSIG
+ </small>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Lawrence Lessig is a Professor of Law at Harvard Law
+School, the director of the
+ <br>
+ Edmond J. Safra Foundation Center
+for Ethics, and the founder of Stanford Law
+ <br>
+ School’s Center for
+Internet and Society. For much of his career, he focused his
+ <br>
+ work on
law and technology, especially as it affects copyright. He is the
author of numerous books and has served as a board member of many
-organizations,<br> including the Free Software Foundation.
-</p>
-<hr size="2"></section></body></html>
+organizations,
+ <br>
+ including the Free Software Foundation.
+ </br>
+ </br>
+ </br>
+ </br>
+ </p>
+ <hr size="2"/>
+</section>
diff --git a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_U.1.html
b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_U.1.html
index 79a13c7..2e059c5 100644
--- a/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_U.1.html
+++ b/talerfrontends/blog/articles/scrap1_U.1.html
@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
-<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/loose.dtd";>
-<html><!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
+<!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected
Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
Free Software Foundation
@@ -19,63 +18,52 @@ ISBN 978-0-9831592-0-9
Cover design by Rob Myers.
Cover photograph by Peter Hinely.
- --><!-- Created on February 18, 2016 by texi2html 1.82
-texi2html was written by:
- Lionel Cons <address@hidden> (original author)
- Karl Berry <address@hidden>
- Olaf Bachmann <address@hidden>
- and many others.
-Maintained by: Many creative people.
-Send bugs and suggestions to <address@hidden>
---><head><title>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: Preface to the Second
Edition</title><meta name="description" content="This is the second edition of
Richard Stallman's collection of essays."><meta name="keywords" content="Free
Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: Preface to the Second Edition"><meta
name="resource-type" content="document"><meta name="distribution"
content="global"><meta name="Generator" content="texi2html 1.82"><meta
http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charse [...]
-<!--
-a.summary-letter {text-decoration: none}
-blockquote.smallquotation {font-size: smaller}
-pre.display {font-family: serif}
-pre.format {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-comment {font-family: serif}
-pre.menu-preformatted {font-family: serif}
-pre.smalldisplay {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallexample {font-size: smaller}
-pre.smallformat {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller}
-pre.smalllisp {font-size: smaller}
-span.roman {font-family:serif; font-weight:normal;}
-span.sansserif {font-family:sans-serif; font-weight:normal;}
-ul.toc {list-style: none}
--->
-</style><link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
href="../static/web-common/style.css"></head><body lang="en" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
text="#000000" link="#0000FF" vlink="#800080" alink="#FF0000" class="article">
+ -->
-<a name="Preface"></a>
-<header><div id="logo"><a href="/"><img src="../static/gnu.svg" height="100"
width="100"></a></div><h1 class="book-title">Free Software, Free Society, 2nd
ed.</h1></header><section id="main"><a name="Preface-to-the-Second-Edition"></a>
-<h1 class="unnumbered"> Preface to the Second Edition </h1>
-
-<p>The second edition of <cite>Free Software, Free Society</cite> holds updated
+<section id="main">
+ <a name="Preface-to-the-Second-Edition">
+ </a>
+ <h1 class="unnumbered">
+ Preface to the Second Edition
+ </h1>
+ <p>
+ The second edition of
+ <cite>
+ Free Software, Free Society
+ </cite>
+ holds updated
versions of most of the essays from the first edition, as well as many
new essays published since the first edition.
-</p>
-<p>The essays about software patents are now in one section and those
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The essays about software patents are now in one section and those
about copyright in another, to set an example of not grouping together
these two laws, whose workings and effects on software are totally
different.
-</p>
-<p>Another section presents the GNU licenses, with a new introduction
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Another section presents the GNU licenses, with a new introduction
written with Brett Smith giving their history and the motives for each
of them. One of the essays explains why software projects should
upgrade to version 3 of the GNU General Public License.
-</p>
-<p>There is now a section on issues of terminology, since the way we
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ There is now a section on issues of terminology, since the way we
describe an issue affects how people think about it.
-</p>
-<p>The last two sections describe some of the traps free software
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The last two sections describe some of the traps free software
developers and users face—new ways to lose your freedom, and how to
avoid them.
-</p>
-<p>We have also added an index, to complement the appendix on software.
-</p>
-<p>We would like to thank Jeanne Rasata for managing the project, editing
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ We have also added an index, to complement the appendix on software.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ We would like to thank Jeanne Rasata for managing the project, editing
the book, formatting the text, and creating the index. Thanks also to
Karl Berry for technical assistance with Texinfo, Brett Smith for all
other technical help and for valuable feedback, and Rob Myers for
formatting the cover.
-</p>
-</section></body></html>
+ </p>
+</section>
--
To stop receiving notification emails like this one, please contact
address@hidden