www/philosophy selling.html

[Richard M. Stallman]

CVSROOT:        /webcvs/www
Module name:    www
Changes by:     Richard M. Stallman <rms>       09/12/15 15:40:50

Modified files:
        philosophy     : selling.html 

Log message:
        Minor cleanups.

CVSWeb URLs:
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/selling.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.30&r2=1.31

Patches:
Index: selling.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /webcvs/www/www/philosophy/selling.html,v
retrieving revision 1.30
retrieving revision 1.31
diff -u -b -r1.30 -r1.31
--- selling.html        30 Jun 2009 15:57:19 -0000      1.30
+++ selling.html        15 Dec 2009 15:40:45 -0000      1.31
@@ -12,13 +12,13 @@
 <!-- language, where necessary. -->
 
 <p>
-Many people believe that the spirit of the GNU project is that you
+Many people believe that the spirit of the GNU Project is that you
 should not charge money for distributing copies of software, or that
 you should charge as little as possible &mdash; just enough to cover
-the cost.</p>
+the cost.  This is a misunderstanding.</p>
 
 <p>
-Actually we encourage people who redistribute
+Actually, we encourage people who redistribute
 <a href="/philosophy/free-sw.html">free software</a>
 to charge as much as they wish or can.  If this seems surprising to
 you, please read on.</p>
@@ -38,15 +38,16 @@
 because users have freedom in using it.</p>
 
 <p>
-<a href="/philosophy/categories.html#ProprietarySoftware">Non-free programs</a>
+<a href="/philosophy/categories.html#ProprietarySoftware">Nonfree programs</a>
 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 non-free because users don't have
+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 isn't more
-free, or closer to free.  So if you are redistributing copies of free
+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
 legitimate activity; if you do it, you might as well make a profit
@@ -55,10 +56,9 @@
 <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 the
-<a href="/fsf/fsf.html">Free Software Foundation</a>
-or some other free software development project.  By funding
-development, you can advance the world of free software.</p>
+distributor, the way to do this is to give a part of the profit to free 
software development projects or to the
+<a href="/fsf/fsf.html">Free Software Foundation</a>.  This way you can
+advance the world of free software.</p>
 
 <p>
 <strong>Distributing free software is an opportunity to raise
@@ -112,8 +112,9 @@
 <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 will continue to use proprietary software if
-free software can't do all the jobs they want to do.  Thus, if we want
+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>
 
@@ -165,16 +166,16 @@
 Without a limit on the fee for the source code, they would be able set
 a fee too large for anyone to pay&mdash;such as a billion
 dollars&mdash;and thus pretend to release source code while in truth
-concealing it.  So in this case we have to limit the fee for source,
+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 of what the GNU
-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
+Sometimes companies whose activities cross the line stated in the GNU
+GPL plead for permission, saying that they &ldquo;won't charge
+money for the GNU software&rdquo; 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.</p>
@@ -219,7 +220,7 @@
 <p>
 Updated:
 <!-- timestamp start -->
-$Date: 2009/06/30 15:57:19 $
+$Date: 2009/12/15 15:40:45 $
 <!-- timestamp end -->
 </p>
 </div>