www/philosophy selling.html

[Karl Berry]

CVSROOT:        /web/www
Module name:    www
Changes by:     Karl Berry <karl>       06/11/15 23:57:14

Modified files:
        philosophy     : selling.html 

Log message:
        ldquo/rdquo

CVSWeb URLs:
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/selling.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.17&r2=1.18

Patches:
Index: selling.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/selling.html,v
retrieving revision 1.17
retrieving revision 1.18
diff -u -b -r1.17 -r1.18
--- selling.html        26 Oct 2006 19:56:09 -0000      1.17
+++ selling.html        15 Nov 2006 23:57:10 -0000      1.18
@@ -36,7 +36,7 @@
   <li><a href="#HigherPriceNoDiscourage"
        id="TOCHigherPriceNoDiscourage">Will a higher distribution price 
discourage use of free software?</a></li>
   <li><a href="#ConfusingTerm"
-       id="TOCConfusingTerm">The term ``selling software'' can be confusing 
too</a></li>
+       id="TOCConfusingTerm">The term &ldquo;selling software&rdquo; can be 
confusing too</a></li>
   <li><a href="#HighOrLowFeesAndGPL"
        id="TOCHighOrLowFeesAndGPL">High or low fees, and the GNU GPL</a></li>
   <li><a href="/philosophy/philosophy.html">Other Texts to Read</a></li>
@@ -57,10 +57,10 @@
 you, please read on.</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 word &ldquo;free&rdquo; has two legitimate general meanings; it can refer
+either to freedom or to price.  When we speak of &ldquo;free software&rdquo;,
+we're talking about freedom, not price.  (Think of &ldquo;free speech&rdquo;,
+not &ldquo;free beer&rdquo;.)  Specifically, it means that a user is free to 
run
 the program, change the program, and redistribute the program with or
 without changes.</p>
 
@@ -162,23 +162,23 @@
 
 
 <h4><a href="#TOCConfusingTerm"
-       id="ConfusingTerm">The term ``selling software'' can be confusing 
too</a></h4>
+       id="ConfusingTerm">The term &ldquo;selling software&rdquo; can be 
confusing too</a></h4>
 
 <p>
-Strictly speaking, ``selling'' means trading goods for money.  Selling
+Strictly speaking, &ldquo;selling&rdquo; 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
-<a href="words-to-avoid.html#SellSoftware">``selling software''</a>,
+<a href="words-to-avoid.html#SellSoftware">&ldquo;selling software&rdquo;</a>,
 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
 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
+&ldquo;selling software&rdquo; and choose some other wording instead.  For
+example, you could say &ldquo;distributing free software for a fee&rdquo;--that
 is unambiguous.</p>
 
 
@@ -207,8 +207,8 @@
 
 <p>
 Sometimes companies whose activities cross the line of what the GNU
-GPL permits plead for permission, saying that they ``won't charge
-money for the GNU software'' or such like.  They don't get anywhere
+GPL permits plead for permission, saying that they &ldquo;won't charge
+money for the GNU software&rdquo; or such like.  They don't get anywhere
 this way.  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
@@ -295,7 +295,7 @@
 <p>
 Updated:
 <!-- timestamp start -->
-$Date: 2006/10/26 19:56:09 $ $Author: johnsu01 $
+$Date: 2006/11/15 23:57:10 $ $Author: karl $
 <!-- timestamp end -->
 </p>
 </div>