[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
www licenses/licenses.es.html licenses/licenses...
|
From: |
Yavor Doganov |
|
Subject: |
www licenses/licenses.es.html licenses/licenses... |
|
Date: |
Sat, 07 Jan 2012 01:27:18 +0000 |
CVSROOT: /web/www
Module name: www
Changes by: Yavor Doganov <yavor> 12/01/07 01:27:18
Modified files:
licenses : licenses.es.html licenses.pl.html
licenses/po : licenses.pl-en.html
philosophy : essays-and-articles.pl.html
free-software-for-freedom.pl.html
microsoft-verdict.pl.html
no-word-attachments.es.html
open-source-misses-the-point.es.html
philosophy.pl.html pragmatic.pl.html
why-free.pl.html
philosophy/po : essays-and-articles.pl-en.html
philosophy.pl-en.html pragmatic.translist
Added files:
licenses/po : licenses.es-en.html
philosophy/po : free-software-for-freedom.pl-en.html
microsoft-verdict.pl-en.html
no-word-attachments.es-en.html
open-source-misses-the-point.es-en.html
pragmatic.pl-en.html why-free.pl-en.html
Log message:
Automatic update by GNUnited Nations.
CVSWeb URLs:
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/licenses/licenses.es.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.30&r2=1.31
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/licenses/licenses.pl.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.57&r2=1.58
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/licenses/po/licenses.pl-en.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.1&r2=1.2
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/licenses/po/licenses.es-en.html?cvsroot=www&rev=1.1
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/essays-and-articles.pl.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.16&r2=1.17
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.pl.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.45&r2=1.46
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/microsoft-verdict.pl.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.17&r2=1.18
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/no-word-attachments.es.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.22&r2=1.23
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.es.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.30&r2=1.31
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/philosophy.pl.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.171&r2=1.172
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/pragmatic.pl.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.30&r2=1.31
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/why-free.pl.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.26&r2=1.27
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/po/essays-and-articles.pl-en.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.2&r2=1.3
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/po/philosophy.pl-en.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.2&r2=1.3
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/po/pragmatic.translist?cvsroot=www&r1=1.2&r2=1.3
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/po/free-software-for-freedom.pl-en.html?cvsroot=www&rev=1.1
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/po/microsoft-verdict.pl-en.html?cvsroot=www&rev=1.1
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/po/no-word-attachments.es-en.html?cvsroot=www&rev=1.1
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/po/open-source-misses-the-point.es-en.html?cvsroot=www&rev=1.1
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/po/pragmatic.pl-en.html?cvsroot=www&rev=1.1
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/po/why-free.pl-en.html?cvsroot=www&rev=1.1
Patches:
Index: licenses/licenses.es.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/licenses/licenses.es.html,v
retrieving revision 1.30
retrieving revision 1.31
diff -u -b -r1.30 -r1.31
--- licenses/licenses.es.html 20 Sep 2011 17:13:20 -0000 1.30
+++ licenses/licenses.es.html 7 Jan 2012 01:26:49 -0000 1.31
@@ -411,9 +411,11 @@
de GNU</a> (FDL de GNU, por sus siglas en inglés).
</p>
-<p>
-Para ensayos de opinión y escritos cientÃficos recomendamos la licencia de
-«sólo copia literal» usada en esta página.</p>
+<p>Para ensayos de opinión y artÃculos cientÃficos, recomendamos tanto la <a
+rel="license"
+href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/us/deed.es";>licencia
+Creative Commons Atribución-SinDerivadas 3.0 Estados Unidos de América</a>,
+como la simple licencia «verbatim copying only»,que citamos arriba.</p>
<p>
Nosotros no nos posicionamos sobre si las obras artÃsticas o de
@@ -421,44 +423,37 @@
hacerla libre, recomendamos la <a
href="http://artlibre.org/licence/lalgb.html";>Licencia de Arte Libre</a>.</p>
-<!-- If needed, change the copyright block at the bottom. In general, -->
-<!-- all pages on the GNU web server should have the section about -->
-<!-- verbatim copying. Please do NOT remove this without talking -->
-<!-- with the webmasters first. -->
-<!-- Please make sure the copyright date is consistent with the document -->
-<!-- and that it is like this "2001, 2002" not this "2001-2002." -->
+<!-- If needed, change the copyright block at the bottom. In general,
+ pages on the GNU web server should be under CC BY-ND 3.0 US.
+ Please do NOT change or remove this without talking
+ with the webmasters or licensing team first.
+ Please make sure the copyright date is consistent with the document
+ and that it is like this: "2001, 2002", not this: "2001-2002". -->
<div style="font-size: small;">
<!--TRANSLATORS: Use space (SPC) as msgstr if you don't have notes.-->
</div>
</div>
+<!-- for id="content", starts in the include above -->
<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.es.html" -->
<div id="footer">
-<p>
-Por favor, envÃe sus preguntas sobre la FSF y GNU a <a
+
+<p>Por favor, envÃe sus preguntas sobre la FSF y GNU a <a
href="mailto:address@hidden";><address@hidden></a>. También dispone <a
-href="/contact/">de otros medios para contactar</a> con la FSF.
-<br />
+href="/contact/">de otros medios para contactar</a> con la FSF.<br />
Por favor, envÃe enlaces rotos y otras correcciones o sugerencias a <a
-href="mailto:address@hidden";>>address@hidden<</a>.
-</p>
+href="mailto:address@hidden";>>address@hidden<</a>.</p>
-<p>
-Por favor, vea <a href="/server/standards/README.translations.es.html">el
+<p>Por favor, vea <a href="/server/standards/README.translations.es.html">el
LÃAME de las traducciones</a> para informarse sobre cómo se coordinan y
-envÃan las traducciones de este articulo.
-</p>
+envÃan las traducciones de este articulo.</p>
-<p>
-Copyright © 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2009
-Free Software Foundation, Inc.</p>
-<address>51 Franklin St, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110-1301, USA</address>
-<p>
-Está página está bajo una <a rel="license"
+<p>Copyright © 2011 Free Software Foundation, Inc.</p>
+
+<p>Está página está bajo una <a rel="license"
href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/us/deed.es";>licencia
-Creative Commons Atribución-SinDerivadas 3.0 Estados Unidos de América</a>.
-</p>
+Creative Commons Atribución-SinDerivadas 3.0 Estados Unidos de
América</a>.</p>
<div class="translators-credits">
@@ -468,76 +463,20 @@
<address@hidden>Revisión: 05 mar 2003 Luis BustamanteRevisión: 27 oct
2003 Santiago Becerra CarrilloActualización: 07 mar 2004 Miguel AbadUpdate:
Gabriel Franco <address@hidden>--></div>
+
<p>
Para informarse de <a
href="http://gnu.org/server/standards/translations/es/#ayudar";><em>cómo
traducir al
español o enviar correcciones</em></a> de esta traducción visite el sitio web
del <a href="http://gnu.org/server/standards/translations/es/";>Equipo de
traducción al español de GNU</a>.
</p>
- <p>
-<!-- timestamp start -->
+ <p><!-- timestamp start -->
Ãltima actualización:
-$Date: 2011/09/20 17:13:20 $
+$Date: 2012/01/07 01:26:49 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
</div>
-
-<!-- <div id="translations">
- -->
-<!-- <h4>
-Translations of this page</h4> -->
-<!-- -->
-<!-- Please keep this list alphabetical by language code. -->
-<!-- Comment what the language is for each type, i.e. de is German. -->
-<!-- Write the language name in its own language (Deutsch) in the text. -->
-<!-- If you add a new language here, please -->
-<!-- advise address@hidden and add it to -->
-<!-- - /home/www/html/server/standards/README.translations.html -->
-<!-- - one of the lists under the section "Translations Underway" -->
-<!-- - if there is a translation team, you also have to add an alias -->
-<!-- to mail.gnu.org:/com/mailer/aliases -->
-<!-- Please also check you have the language code right; see: -->
-<!-- http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/php/code_list.php -->
-<!-- If the 2-letter ISO 639-1 code is not available, -->
-<!-- use the 3-letter ISO 639-2. -->
-<!-- Please use W3C normative character entities. -->
-<!-- -->
-<!-- <gnun>
-<ul class="translations-list"> -->
-<!-- Arabic -->
-<!-- <li><a
href="/licenses/licenses.ar.html">العربية</a> [ar]</li>
-->
-<!-- Catalan -->
-<!-- <li><a href="/licenses/licenses.ca.html">Català</a> [ca]</li>
-->
-<!-- German -->
-<!-- <li><a href="/licenses/licenses.de.html">Deutsch</a> [de]</li> -->
-<!-- Greek -->
-<!-- <li><a
href="/licenses/licenses.el.html">Ελληνικά</a> [el]</li>
-->
-<!-- English -->
-<!-- <li><a href="/licenses/licenses.html">English</a> [en]</li> -->
-<!-- Spanish -->
-<!-- <li><a
href="/licenses/licenses.es.html">Español</a> [es]</li> -->
-<!-- French -->
-<!-- <li><a
href="/licenses/licenses.fr.html">Français</a> [fr]</li> -->
-<!-- Italian -->
-<!-- <li><a href="/licenses/licenses.it.html">Italiano</a> [it]</li> -->
-<!-- Japanese -->
-<!-- <li><a
href="/licenses/licenses.ja.html">日本語</a> [ja]</li>
-->
-<!-- Dutch -->
-<!-- <li><a href="/licenses/licenses.nl.html">Nederlands</a> [nl]</li> -->
-<!-- Polish -->
-<!-- <li><a href="/licenses/licenses.pl.html">polski</a> [pl]</li> -->
-<!-- Brazilian Portuguese -->
-<!-- <li><a href="/licenses/licenses.pt-br.html">português do
Brasil</a> [pt-br]</li> -->
-<!-- Serbian -->
-<!-- <li><a
href="/licenses/licenses.sr.html">Српски</a> [sr]</li>
-->
-<!-- Chinese (Simplified) -->
-<!-- <li><a
href="/licenses/licenses.zh-cn.html">简体中文</a> [zh-cn]</li>
-->
-<!-- Chinese (Traditional) -->
-<!-- <li><a
href="/licenses/licenses.zh-tw.html">繁體中文</a> [zh-tw]</li>
-->
-<!-- </ul></gnun> -->
-<!-- </div>
- -->
</div>
</body>
</html>
Index: licenses/licenses.pl.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/licenses/licenses.pl.html,v
retrieving revision 1.57
retrieving revision 1.58
diff -u -b -r1.57 -r1.58
--- licenses/licenses.pl.html 29 Nov 2011 17:28:04 -0000 1.57
+++ licenses/licenses.pl.html 7 Jan 2012 01:26:49 -0000 1.58
@@ -61,7 +61,7 @@
naruszenia licencji GNU</a></li>
<li><a href="/philosophy/university.html">Wydawanie wolnego oprogramowania
a praca na uczelni</a></li>
- <li><a href="/licenses/why-assign.pl.html">Dlaczego FSF pobiera
+ <li><a href="/licenses/why-assign.html">Dlaczego FSF pobiera
od wspóÅpracowników deklaracje przepisania praw autorskich</a></li>
<li><a href="/graphics/license-logos.html">Logo licencji GNU</a>
do użycia
we wÅasnych projektach</li>
@@ -471,7 +471,7 @@
<p><!-- timestamp start -->
Aktualizowane:
-$Date: 2011/11/29 17:28:04 $
+$Date: 2012/01/07 01:26:49 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
Index: licenses/po/licenses.pl-en.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/licenses/po/licenses.pl-en.html,v
retrieving revision 1.1
retrieving revision 1.2
diff -u -b -r1.1 -r1.2
--- licenses/po/licenses.pl-en.html 29 Nov 2011 17:28:17 -0000 1.1
+++ licenses/po/licenses.pl-en.html 7 Jan 2012 01:26:55 -0000 1.2
@@ -432,7 +432,7 @@
<p>Updated:
<!-- timestamp start -->
-$Date: 2011/11/29 17:28:17 $
+$Date: 2012/01/07 01:26:55 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
</div>
Index: philosophy/essays-and-articles.pl.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/essays-and-articles.pl.html,v
retrieving revision 1.16
retrieving revision 1.17
diff -u -b -r1.16 -r1.17
--- philosophy/essays-and-articles.pl.html 5 Jan 2012 17:28:54 -0000
1.16
+++ philosophy/essays-and-articles.pl.html 7 Jan 2012 01:27:02 -0000
1.17
@@ -24,7 +24,7 @@
<!-- have the URLs bookmarked or on their pages. -len -->
<a id="TOCFreedomOrganizations">My</a> <a
id="FreedomOrganizations">także</a> mamy listÄ <a
-href="/links/links.pl.html#FreedomOrganizations">organizacji pracujÄ
cych
+href="/links/links.html#FreedomOrganizations">organizacji pracujÄ
cych
na rzecz wolnoÅci w rozwoju komputerów i komunikacji
elektronicznej</a>.</p>
@@ -39,35 +39,33 @@
z nich czyniÄ użytek.</p>
<ul>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/free-sw.pl.html">Czym jest Wolne
Oprogramowanie?</a></li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/why-free.pl.html">Dlaczego oprogramowanie
-nie powinno mieÄ wÅaÅcicieli</a></li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/shouldbefree.pl.html">Dlaczego oprogramowanie
powinno
-byÄ wolne</a> (To jest starszy i dÅuższy esej o tym samym co
-wyżej)</li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/free-doc.pl.html">Dlaczego wolne oprogramowanie
-potrzebuje wolnej dokumentacji</a></li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/selling.pl.html">Sprzedaż wolnego
oprogramowania</a>
-jest w porzÄ
dku!</li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/categories.pl.html">Kategorie wolnego
-i nie-wolnego oprogramowania</a></li>
- <li><a href="/software/reliability.pl.html">Wolne oprogramowanie jest
bardziej
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/free-sw.html">Czym jest Wolne
Oprogramowanie?</a></li>
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/why-free.html">Dlaczego oprogramowanie
nie powinno
+mieÄ wÅaÅcicieli</a></li>
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/shouldbefree.html">Dlaczego oprogramowanie powinno
byÄ
+wolne</a> (To jest starszy i dÅuższy esej o tym samym co
wyżej)</li>
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/free-doc.html">Dlaczego wolne oprogramowanie
potrzebuje
+wolnej dokumentacji</a></li>
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/selling.html">Sprzedaż wolnego oprogramowania</a>
jest
+w porzÄ
dku!</li>
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/categories.html">Kategorie wolnego
i nie-wolnego
+oprogramowania</a></li>
+ <li><a href="/software/reliability.html">Wolne oprogramowanie jest bardziej
niezawodne!</a></li>
<li><a href="/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html">Dlaczego
„otwartemu oprogramowaniu” umyka idea wolnego
oprogramowania</a></li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/linux-gnu-freedom.pl.html">Linux, GNU
-i wolnoÅÄ</a></li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/gnutella.pl.html"
id="Gnutella">O Gnutelli</a></li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/schools.pl.html">Dlaczego szkoÅy powinny używaÄ
-wyÅÄ
cznie wolnego oprogramowania</a></li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/my_doom.pl.html">MyDoom i Ty</a></li>
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/linux-gnu-freedom.html">Linux, GNU
i wolnoÅÄ</a></li>
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/gnutella.html"
id="Gnutella">O Gnutelli</a></li>
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/schools.html">Dlaczego szkoÅy powinny używaÄ
wyÅÄ
cznie
+wolnego oprogramowania</a></li>
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/my_doom.html">MyDoom i Ty</a></li>
<li><a href="/philosophy/15-years-of-free-software.html">15 lat wolnego
oprogramowania</a></li>
<li><a href="/philosophy/free-software-intro.html">Ruch wolnego
oprogramowania</a></li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/your-freedom-needs-free-software.pl.html">Twoja
wolnoÅÄ
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/your-freedom-needs-free-software.html">Twoja
wolnoÅÄ
potrzebuje wolnego oprogramowania</a></li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/fs-motives.pl.html">Motywacje do pisania
wolnego
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/fs-motives.html">Motywacje do pisania wolnego
oprogramowania</a></li>
<li><a href="/philosophy/gov-promote.html">W jaki sposób powinny rzÄ
dy
promowaÄ wolne oprogramowanie?</a></li>
@@ -76,35 +74,34 @@
<h3 id="aboutgnu">O systemie operacyjnym GNU</h3>
<ul>
- <li><a href="/gnu/initial-announcement.pl.html">Pierwsze ogÅoszenie
+ <li><a href="/gnu/initial-announcement.html">Pierwsze ogÅoszenie
o powstaniu projektu GNU</a></li>
- <li><a href="/gnu/manifesto.pl.html">Manifest GNU</a></li>
- <li><a href="/gnu/gnu-history.pl.html">Krótka historia projektu GNU</a></li>
- <li><a href="/gnu/thegnuproject.pl.html">Projekt GNU</a>, dÅuższy
-i bardziej kompletny opis projektu i jego historii.</li>
- <li><a href="/fsf/fsf.pl.html">Czym jest Fundacja Wolnego Oprogramowania
-(FSF)?</a></li>
- <li><a href="/gnu/why-gnu-linux.pl.html">Dlaczego GNU/Linux?</a></li>
+ <li><a href="/gnu/manifesto.html">Manifest GNU</a></li>
+ <li><a href="/gnu/gnu-history.html">Krótka historia projektu GNU</a></li>
+ <li><a href="/gnu/thegnuproject.html">Projekt GNU</a>, dÅuższy
i bardziej
+kompletny opis projektu i jego historii.</li>
+ <li><a href="/fsf/fsf.html">Czym jest Fundacja Wolnego Oprogramowania
(FSF)?</a></li>
+ <li><a href="/gnu/why-gnu-linux.html">Dlaczego GNU/Linux?</a></li>
</ul>
<h3 id="LicensingFreeSoftware">O licencjonowaniu wolnego
oprogramowania</h3>
<ul>
- <li><a href="/licenses/licenses.pl.html">Ogólne informacje
-o licencjonowaniu oraz idei copyleft</a></li>
- <li><a href="/licenses/license-list.pl.html">Lista konkretnych licencji
wolnego
+ <li><a href="/licenses/licenses.html">Ogólne informacje
o licencjonowaniu
+oraz idei copyleft</a></li>
+ <li><a href="/licenses/license-list.html">Lista konkretnych licencji wolnego
oprogramowania</a></li>
- <li><a href="/licenses/gpl-faq.pl.html">CzÄsto zadawane pytania
na temat
+ <li><a href="/licenses/gpl-faq.html">CzÄsto zadawane pytania na temat
licencji GNU</a></li>
- <li><a href="/licenses/why-not-lgpl.pl.html">Dlaczego nie powinniÅcie użyÄ
-licencji Lesser GPL dla swojej kolejnej biblioteki</a></li>
- <li><a href="/copyleft/copyleft.pl.html">Copyleft</a></li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/why-copyleft.pl.html">Dlaczego copyleft?</a></li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/university.pl.html">Wydawanie wolnego oprogramowania
+ <li><a href="/licenses/why-not-lgpl.html">Dlaczego nie powinniÅcie użyÄ
licencji
+Lesser GPL dla swojej kolejnej biblioteki</a></li>
+ <li><a href="/copyleft/copyleft.html">Copyleft</a></li>
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/why-copyleft.html">Dlaczego copyleft?</a></li>
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/university.html">Wydawanie wolnego oprogramowania
a praca na uczelni</a></li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/pragmatic.pl.html">Copyleft - pragmatyczny
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/pragmatic.html">Copyleft - pragmatyczny
idealizm</a></li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/javascript-trap.pl.html">PuÅapka
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/javascript-trap.html">PuÅapka
Javascript</a> – możliwe, że nieÅwiadomie korzystacie
z nie-wolnych programów na swoim komputerze każdego dnia –
przez przeglÄ
darkÄ internetowÄ
.</li>
@@ -113,53 +110,53 @@
<li><a href="http://www.fsf.org/blogs/licensing/20050211.html";>Censorship
envy
and licensing</a> [<em>ZazdroÅÄ cenzury i licencjowania</em>, artykuÅ
po angielsku - przyp. tÅum.]</li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/x.pl.html">PuÅapka X Window</a></li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/apsl.pl.html">Problemy z licencjÄ
Apple</a></li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/bsd.pl.html">Problem z licencjÄ
BSD</a></li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/netscape-npl.pl.html">Licencja Netscape Public
License
-ma poważne wady</a></li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/udi.pl.html">Ruch wolnego oprogramowania
i UDI</a></li>
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/x.html">PuÅapka X Window</a></li>
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/apsl.html">Problemy z licencjÄ
Apple</a></li>
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/bsd.html">Problem z licencjÄ
BSD</a></li>
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/netscape-npl.html">Licencja Netscape Public License
ma
+poważne wady</a></li>
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/udi.html">Ruch wolnego oprogramowania
i UDI</a></li>
<li><a href="/philosophy/gates.html">To nie [Bill] Gates, to kraty</a>,
artykuÅ
Richarda Stallmana opublikowany w BBC News w 2008 r.</li>
<li><a href="/philosophy/microsoft.html">Czy Microsoft jest Wielkim
-Szatanem?</a> (<a href="/philosophy/microsoft-old.pl.html">starsza
-werjsa</a> tego artykuÅu jest także dostÄpna.)</li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/microsoft-antitrust.pl.html">Proces antymonopolowy
-przeciw Microsoftowi a wolne oprogramowanie</a></li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/microsoft-verdict.pl.html">O werdykcie sÄ
dowym
+Szatanem?</a> (<a href="/philosophy/microsoft-old.html">starsza werjsa</a>
+tego artykuÅu jest także dostÄpna.)</li>
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/microsoft-antitrust.html">Proces antymonopolowy
przeciw
+Microsoftowi a wolne oprogramowanie</a></li>
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/microsoft-verdict.html">O werdykcie sÄ
dowym
w sprawie Microsoftu</a></li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/microsoft-new-monopoly.pl.html">Nowy monopol
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/microsoft-new-monopoly.html">Nowy monopol
Microsoftu</a></li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/lest-codeplex-perplex.pl.html">Oby CodePlex
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/lest-codeplex-perplex.html">Oby CodePlex
nie wywoÅywaÅ konsternacji</a></li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/plan-nine.pl.html" id="PlanNineLicense">Problemy
-zwiÄ
zane z licencjÄ
systemu Plan 9</a></li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/motif.pl.html" id="MotifLicense">Nowa licencja
-biblioteki Motif</a></li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/using-gfdl.pl.html" id="UsingGFDL">Korzystanie
-z GNU FDL</a></li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/gpl-american-way.pl.html" id="GPLAmericanWay">GNU
GPL
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/plan-nine.html" id="PlanNineLicense">Problemy zwiÄ
zane
+z licencjÄ
systemu Plan 9</a></li>
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/motif.html" id="MotifLicense">Nowa licencja
biblioteki
+Motif</a></li>
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/using-gfdl.html" id="UsingGFDL">Korzystanie
z GNU
+FDL</a></li>
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/gpl-american-way.html" id="GPLAmericanWay">GNU GPL
i <em>AmerykaÅski styl życia</em></a></li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/gpl-american-dream.pl.html"
id="GPLAmericanDream">GNU
-GPL i <em>AmerykaÅski Sen</em></a></li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/enforcing-gpl.pl.html"
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/gpl-american-dream.html" id="GPLAmericanDream">GNU
GPL
+i <em>AmerykaÅski Sen</em></a></li>
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/enforcing-gpl.html"
id="EnforcingGPL">O egzekwowaniu przestrzegania GNU GPL</a></li>
<li><a href="/philosophy/selling-exceptions.html">O sprzedawaniu wyjÄ
tków
do GNU GPL</a></li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/freedom-or-power.pl.html"
id="FreedomOrPower">WolnoÅÄ
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/freedom-or-power.html" id="FreedomOrPower">WolnoÅÄ
czy wÅadza?</a></li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/no-word-attachments.pl.html"
-id="NoWordAttachments">Możemy poÅożyÄ kres zaÅÄ
cznikom Worda</a></li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/java-trap.pl.html" id="JavaTrap">Wolne,
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html"
id="NoWordAttachments">Możemy
+poÅożyÄ kres zaÅÄ
cznikom Worda</a></li>
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/java-trap.html" id="JavaTrap">Wolne,
lecz w okowach â puÅapka Javy</a> (chociaż w grudniu
2006 Sun byÅ w trakcie przygotowaÅ do <a
href="http://www.fsf.org/news/fsf-welcomes-gpl-java.html";>ponownego wydania
platformy Java, tym razem na warunkach GNU GPL</a>, opisana
w artykule kwestia w dalszym ciÄ
gu jest istotna)</li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/fighting-software-patents.pl.html"
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/fighting-software-patents.html"
id="FightingSoftwarePatents">Zwalczanie patentów
na oprogramowanie - w pojedynkÄ i wspólnie</a></li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/software-literary-patents.pl.html"
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/software-literary-patents.html"
id="SoftwareLiteraryPatents">Patenty na oprogramowanie i patenty
na literaturÄ</a> pióra Richarda M. Stallmana. JeÅli mowa
o patentowaniu technik artystycznych, to amerykaÅski patent
@@ -177,14 +174,14 @@
<h4>Prawa autorskie</h4>
<ul>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/public-domain-manifesto.pl.html">Dlaczego
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/public-domain-manifesto.html">Dlaczego
nie podpiszÄ Public Domain Manifesto</a> [<em>Manifestu domeny
publicznej</em> - przyp. tÅum.]</li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/pirate-party.pl.html">Jak pomysÅy szwedzkiej partii
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/pirate-party.html">Jak pomysÅy szwedzkiej partii
piratów majÄ
niepożÄ
dane konsekwencje dla wolnego
oprogramowania</a></li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/misinterpreting-copyright.pl.html">BÅÄdne
interpretacje
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/misinterpreting-copyright.html">BÅÄdne
interpretacje
prawa autorskiego</a> to kolejny esej <a
href="http://www.stallman.org";>Richarda Stallmana</a> o sÅabych
punktach popularnej argumentacji obroÅców istniejÄ
cego prawa
autorskiego.</li>
@@ -193,7 +190,7 @@
jako amicus curiae, streszczenie sprawy Eldred v. Ashcroft przed SÄ
dem
Najwyższym USA.</a></li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/push-copyright-aside.pl.html">Nauka musi
„odÅożyÄ
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/push-copyright-aside.html">Nauka musi
„odÅożyÄ
prawa autorskie na bok”</a>, kolejna praca <a
href="http://www.stallman.org";>Richarda Stallmana</a>. UkazaÅa siÄ
w 2001 roku w <a
@@ -205,7 +202,7 @@
po angielsku - przyp. tÅum.] która jest poÅwiÄcona temu
aby badania naukowe byÅy ogólnie dostÄpne.</li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/reevaluating-copyright.pl.html">Nowa ocena prawa
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/reevaluating-copyright.html">Nowa ocena prawa
autorskiego – spoÅeczeÅstwo musi byÄ górÄ
.</a></li>
<li><a
@@ -213,10 +210,10 @@
v. Reno</a> dotyczy ustawy, która przedÅuża prawa autorskie o dodatkowe
20 lat.</li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/freedom-or-copyright.pl.html">WolnoÅÄ
czy prawo
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/freedom-or-copyright.html">WolnoÅÄ czy prawo
autorskie?</a> autorstwa <a href="http://www.stallman.org/";>Richarda
Stallmana</a> (jest też dostÄpna <a
-href="/philosophy/freedom-or-copyright-old.pl.html">starsza wersja</a> tego
+href="/philosophy/freedom-or-copyright-old.html">starsza wersja</a> tego
eseju).</li>
<li><a href="/philosophy/copyright-versus-community.html"
@@ -250,43 +247,42 @@
<li><a href="/philosophy/why-audio-format-matters.html">Dlaczego format
dźwiÄku
robi różnicÄ</a>, autorstwa Karla Fogela.</li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/opposing-drm.pl.html">Sprzeciw wobec DRM</a>,
autorstwa
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/opposing-drm.html">Sprzeciw wobec DRM</a>, autorstwa
Richarda Stallmana. Odpowiedź na kilka czÄstych pytaÅ na temat
DRM.</li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/ebooks.pl.html">KsiÄ
żki elektroniczne –
-wolnoÅÄ czy prawo autorskie</a>, nieco zmieniona wersja artykuÅu <a
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/ebooks.html">KsiÄ
żki elektroniczne –
wolnoÅÄ
+czy prawo autorskie</a>, nieco zmieniona wersja artykuÅu <a
href="http://www.stallman.org";>Richarda Stallmana</a> opublikowanego
pierwotnie w Technology Review, w roku 2000.</li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/can-you-trust.pl.html">Czy możesz ufaÄ
swojemu
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/can-you-trust.html">Czy możesz ufaÄ swojemu
komputerowi?</a>, praca <a href="http://www.stallman.org";>Richarda
Stallmana</a> o inicjatywach tzw. „trusted computing”
(godnej zaufania techniki komputerowej).</li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/right-to-read.pl.html">Prawo
-do czytania – krótkie opowiadanie antyutopijne</a> autorstwa
-<a href="http://www.stallman.org/";>Richarda Stallmana</a>.</li>
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/right-to-read.html">Prawo
do czytania –
+krótkie opowiadanie antyutopijne</a> autorstwa <a
+href="http://www.stallman.org/";>Richarda Stallmana</a>.</li>
</ul>
<h4>Termin propagandowy <a
-href="/philosophy/words-to-avoid.pl.html#IntellectualProperty">„wÅasnoÅÄ
+href="/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#IntellectualProperty">„wÅasnoÅÄ
intelektualna”</a>.</h4>
<ul>
<li><a href="/philosophy/no-ip-ethos.html">Nie pozwólcie, żeby
„wÅasnoÅÄ
intelektualna” wypaczyÅa Wasz etos</a>, autorstwa Richarda
Stallmana.</li>
<li>Komentarz Richarda Stallmana na temat <a
-href="/philosophy/ipjustice.pl.html">opublikowanego przez ICLC wezwania
+href="/philosophy/ipjustice.html">opublikowanego przez ICLC wezwania
do odrzucenia Dyrektywy o Egzekfowaniu WÅasnoÅci
Intelektualnej</a>.</li>
- <li>Richard Stallman napisaÅ <a
-href="/philosophy/boldrin-levine.pl.html">recenzjÄ rozprawy Boldrina
-i Levine'a „Argumentacja przeciw wÅasnoÅci
+ <li>Richard Stallman napisaÅ <a
href="/philosophy/boldrin-levine.html">recenzjÄ
+rozprawy Boldrina i Levine'a „Argumentacja przeciw wÅasnoÅci
intelektualnej”</a>.</li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/not-ipr.pl.html">PowiedziaÅeÅ „wÅasnoÅÄ
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/not-ipr.html">PowiedziaÅeÅ „wÅasnoÅÄ
intelektualna”? To zwodnicza fatamorgana</a>. Esej Richarda Stallmana
na temat prawdziwego znaczenia okreÅlenia „wÅasnoÅÄ
intelektualna”.</li>
@@ -298,13 +294,13 @@
w sprawie proponowanej przez W3 Consortium polityki „wolnych
od opÅat” patentów</a>.</li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/guardian-article.pl.html">That's fighting talk</a>
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/guardian-article.html">That's fighting talk</a>
[<em>Mowa o walce</em>, artykuÅ po angielsku - przyp. tÅum.]
trochÄ zmieniona wersja artykuÅu <a href="http://www.stallman.org";>Richarda
Stallmana</a> i Nicka Hilla opublikowanego pierwotnie w londyÅskim
<a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk";>The Guardian</a>.</li>
- <li>Jak chroniÄ <a href="/philosophy/protecting.pl.html">Prawo
do pisania
+ <li>Jak chroniÄ <a href="/philosophy/protecting.html">Prawo do pisania
oprogramowania</a> (bez wzglÄdu na to, czy jest ono wolne
czy nie)</li>
@@ -319,13 +315,13 @@
(Motion Picture Association of America)”</a> [w jÄzyku
angielskim].</li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/patent-reform-is-not-enough.pl.html">Reforma systemu
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/patent-reform-is-not-enough.html">Reforma systemu
patentowego nie wystarczy</a>.</li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/savingeurope.pl.html">O ochronie Europy przed
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/savingeurope.html">O ochronie Europy przed
patentami na oprogramowanie</a>.</li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/amazon.pl.html">Bojkotujcie Amazon!</a>.</li>
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/amazon.html">Bojkotujcie Amazon!</a>.</li>
<li><a href="http://www.researchoninnovation.org/patent.pdf";
id="SequentialIPandI">Sequential Innovation, Patents, and Imitation</a>
@@ -334,7 +330,7 @@
matematyczny ilustrujÄ
cy negatywny wpÅyw patentów na postÄp
w dziedzinach takich jak informatyka.</li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/hague.pl.html">NiebezpieczeÅstwo
z Hagi</a>.</li>
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/hague.html">NiebezpieczeÅstwo z Hagi</a>.</li>
<li><a
href="http://technology.guardian.co.uk/online/comment/story/0,12449,1540984,00.html";>Soft
@@ -351,7 +347,7 @@
<li><a href="/philosophy/trivial-patent.html">Anatomia trywialnego
patentu</a>
autorstwa Richarda Stallmana.</li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/gif.pl.html">Dlaczego na stronach WWW projektu
GNU
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/gif.html">Dlaczego na stronach WWW projektu GNU
nie ma obrazków w formacie GIF?</a> Chociaż to już
w kontekÅcie historycznym ilustruje niebezpieczeÅstwa patentów
na oprogramowanie, z powodu tych konkretnych patentów nie ma
@@ -376,7 +372,7 @@
do Åwiata cyfrowego jest dobre? Jak możemy siÄ upewniÄ
aby byÅo?</a> <a href="http://www.stallman.org";>Richarda
Stallmana</a>.</li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/wsis.pl.html">Åwiatowy Szczyt SpoÅeczeÅstwa
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/wsis.html">Åwiatowy Szczyt SpoÅeczeÅstwa
Informacyjnego</a>.</li>
<li>UdostÄpniony do przeczytania <a
@@ -386,12 +382,12 @@
oprogramowanie, wolne spoÅeczeÅstwo. Wybrane eseje Richarda
M. Stallmana</em></a>.</li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/wassenaar.pl.html">Ochotnicy/specjaliÅci
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/wassenaar.html">Ochotnicy/specjaliÅci
od szyfrowania sÄ
potrzebni w krajach nie posiadajÄ
cych
ograniczeÅ eksportowych</a>.</li>
- <li>Jak chroniÄ <a href="/philosophy/basic-freedoms.pl.html"> swobodÄ
-wypowiedzi, prasy i gromadzenia siÄ</a> w Internecie.</li>
+ <li>Jak chroniÄ <a href="/philosophy/basic-freedoms.html"> swobodÄ
wypowiedzi,
+prasy i gromadzenia siÄ</a> w Internecie.</li>
<li><a href="/philosophy/privacyaction.html">ChroÅ prywatnoÅÄ poczty</a>,
kampania aby sprzeciwiÄ siÄ proponowanym przepisom aby poczta
@@ -416,7 +412,7 @@
<h4>Różne</h4>
<ul>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/sun-in-night-time.pl.html">Dziwny przypadek Suna
nocnÄ
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/sun-in-night-time.html">Dziwny przypadek Suna nocnÄ
porÄ
</a>, Richarda Stallmana.</li>
<li><a href="http://counterpunch.org/baker08192004.html";>Why We Need
“Free
@@ -424,10 +420,10 @@
do gÅosowania winny mieÄ „wolne oprogramowanie”</em>,
artykuÅ po angielsku - przyp. tÅum.]</li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/sco/sco-gnu-linux.pl.html">SCO, GNU
i Linux</a>,
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/sco/sco-gnu-linux.html">SCO, GNU i Linux</a>,
pióra Richarda Stallmana, omawia, w jaki sposób proces SCO przeciw IBM
dotyczy pracy projektu GNU. Prosimy o zaglÄ
dniÄcie na stronÄ <a
-href="/philosophy/sco/sco.pl.html">odpowiedzi FSF dla SCO</a>, gdzie
+href="/philosophy/sco/sco.html">odpowiedzi FSF dla SCO</a>, gdzie
zamieÅciliÅmy wiÄcej informacji na ten temat.</li>
<li><a href="/philosophy/ms-doj-tunney.html">OÅwiadczenie FSF
w odpowiedzi
@@ -442,37 +438,36 @@
<li><a href="/philosophy/dat.html">O prawidÅowym sposobie opodatkowania
DAT</a>.</li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/censoring-emacs.pl.html">Cenzura mojego
programu</a>,
-<a href="http://www.stallman.org";>Richard Stallman</a>.</li>
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/censoring-emacs.html">Cenzura mojego programu</a>,
<a
+href="http://www.stallman.org";>Richard Stallman</a>.</li>
</ul>
<h3 id="terminology">Terminologia i definicje</h3>
<ul>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/words-to-avoid.pl.html">MylÄ
ce sÅowa</a>, których
-powinno siÄ unikaÄ.</li>
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html">MylÄ
ce sÅowa</a>, których
powinno
+siÄ unikaÄ.</li>
<li><a href="/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html">Dlaczego
„otwartemu oprogramowaniu” umyka idea wolnego
oprogramowania</a></li>
- <li><a
-href="/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.pl.html">„Oprogramowanie
+ <li><a
href="/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.html">„Oprogramowanie
open source” czy „wolne oprogramowanie”?</a> (To jest
starszy esej o tym samym co poprzedni.)</li>
- <li>Richard Stallman napisaÅ <a
href="/philosophy/drdobbs-letter.pl.html">list
+ <li>Richard Stallman napisaÅ <a href="/philosophy/drdobbs-letter.html">list
do redaktora</a> Dr. Dobb's Journal wyjaÅniajÄ
c szerzej różnice
miÄdzy
ruchem Wolnego Oprogramowania a ruchem Open Source.</li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/categories.pl.html">Kategorie wolnego
-i nie-wolnego oprogramowania</a></li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/fs-translations.pl.html">TÅumaczenia terminu
-„free software”</a>.</li>
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/categories.html">Kategorie wolnego
i nie-wolnego
+oprogramowania</a></li>
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/fs-translations.html">TÅumaczenia terminu
„free
+software”</a>.</li>
</ul>
<h3 id="upholding">Podtrzymywanie wolnoÅci oprogramowania</h3>
<ul>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/use-free-software.pl.html">20 lat SpoÅecznoÅci
Wolnego
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/use-free-software.html">20 lat SpoÅecznoÅci
Wolnego
Oprogramowania</a>. Wielki, choÄ nie caÅkowity,
sukces – co dalej?</li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/mcvoy.pl.html">DziÄkujÄ, Larry McVoy</a>,
autorstwa
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/mcvoy.html">DziÄkujÄ, Larry McVoy</a>, autorstwa
Richarda Stallmana.</li>
<li><a href="/philosophy/social-inertia.html">Przemóc bezwÅadnoÅÄ
spoÅecznÄ
</a>,
Richarda Stallmana.</li>
@@ -534,15 +529,15 @@
<div class="translators-credits">
<!--TRANSLATORS: Use space (SPC) as msgstr if you don't want credits.-->
-TÅumaczenie: Jan Owoc 2010; poprawki: Oskar GaÅecki 2010, Jan Owoc 2011, Jan
-Wieremjewicz 2010.</div>
+TÅumaczenie: Jan Owoc 2010; poprawki: Oskar GaÅecki 2010, Jan Owoc 2011,
+2012, Jan Wieremjewicz 2010.</div>
<p>
<!-- timestamp start -->
Aktualizowane:
-$Date: 2012/01/05 17:28:54 $
+$Date: 2012/01/07 01:27:02 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
Index: philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.pl.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.pl.html,v
retrieving revision 1.45
retrieving revision 1.46
diff -u -b -r1.45 -r1.46
--- philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.pl.html 20 Sep 2011 17:15:18
-0000 1.45
+++ philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.pl.html 7 Jan 2012 01:27:02
-0000 1.46
@@ -232,7 +232,7 @@
o wolnoÅci, czego powodem jest zwykle chÄÄ „uzyskania wiÄkszej
akceptacji ze strony biznesu”. Schemat ten jest szczególnie wyraźny
w przypadku dystrybutorów oprogramowania. Niektóre dystrybucje systemu
-<a href="/gnu/linux-and-gnu.pl.html">GNU/Linux</a> dodajÄ
pakiety
+<a href="/gnu/linux-and-gnu.html">GNU/Linux</a> dodajÄ
pakiety
o restrykcyjnych licencjach do podstawowej, wolnej wersji systemu
i przedstawiajÄ
to użytkownikom jako zaletÄ, a nie jako cofniÄcie
siÄ na Åcieżce do wolnoÅci.</p>
@@ -332,7 +332,7 @@
udostÄpniÄ jako wolne oprogramowanie (lub „open source”) tylko
czÄÅÄ swojej pracy. Ich celem jest praca nad dodatkami prawnie
zastrzeżonymi, (takimi jak oprogramowanie czy <a
-href="/philosophy/free-doc.pl.html">podrÄczniki</a>), by sprzedaÄ je
+href="/philosophy/free-doc.html">podrÄczniki</a>), by sprzedaÄ je
użytkownikom wolnego oprogramowania. MówiÄ
nam, byÅmy uważali to
za wÅaÅciwe, za czÄÅÄ naszej spoÅecznoÅci,
ponieważ czÄÅÄ
pieniÄdzy jest przekazywana na rozwój wolnego oprogramowania.</p>
@@ -483,7 +483,7 @@
Foundation, Inc.,
</p>
<address>51 Franklin St, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110, USA</address>
-<p>Ten utwór jest dostÄpny na <a rel="license"
+<p>Ten utwór jest dostÄpny na <a rel="license"
href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/us/deed.pl";>licencji
Creative Commons Uznanie autorstwa-Bez utworów zależnych 3.0 Stany
Zjednoczone</a>.
@@ -495,11 +495,13 @@
<!--TRANSLATORS: Use space (SPC) as msgstr if you don't want credits.-->
TÅumaczenie: Artur Skura 2001; poprawki: Wojciech Kotwica 2002, 2003, 2004,
Jan Owoc 2010, 2011.</div>
+
+
<p>
<!-- timestamp start -->
Aktualizowane:
-$Date: 2011/09/20 17:15:18 $
+$Date: 2012/01/07 01:27:02 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
@@ -525,6 +527,7 @@
<!-- Please use W3C normative character entities -->
<!-- -->
<!-- <gnun>
+
<ul class="translations-list"> -->
<!-- Bulgarian -->
<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.bg.html">български</a> [bg]</li>
-->
@@ -556,7 +559,8 @@
<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.zh-cn.html">简体中文</a> [zh-cn]</li>
-->
<!-- Chinese (Traditional) -->
<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.zh-tw.html">繁體中文</a> [zh-tw]</li>
-->
-<!-- </ul></gnun> -->
+<!-- </ul>
+</gnun> -->
<!-- </div>
-->
</div>
Index: philosophy/microsoft-verdict.pl.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/microsoft-verdict.pl.html,v
retrieving revision 1.17
retrieving revision 1.18
diff -u -b -r1.17 -r1.18
--- philosophy/microsoft-verdict.pl.html 20 Sep 2011 17:15:32 -0000
1.17
+++ philosophy/microsoft-verdict.pl.html 7 Jan 2012 01:27:02 -0000
1.18
@@ -16,11 +16,11 @@
<!-- Change include statements to be consistent with the relevant -->
<!-- language, where necessary. -->
<p>
-Wielu użytkowników <a href="/gnu/linux-and-gnu.pl.html">GNU/Linuksa</a>
-uważa ten system za konkurencjÄ dla Microsoftu. Jednakże celem Ruchu
-Wolnego Oprogramowania jest rozwiÄ
zanie problemu znacznie wiÄkszego niż
-Microsoft: prawnie zastrzeżonego oprogramowania, które nie jest wolne
-i które ma na celu utrzymywaÄ użytkowników w bezradnoÅci
+Wielu użytkowników <a href="/gnu/linux-and-gnu.html">GNU/Linuksa</a> uważa
+ten system za konkurencjÄ dla Microsoftu. Jednakże celem Ruchu Wolnego
+Oprogramowania jest rozwiÄ
zanie problemu znacznie wiÄkszego niż Microsoft:
+prawnie zastrzeżonego oprogramowania, które nie jest wolne i które ma
+na celu utrzymywaÄ użytkowników w bezradnoÅci
oraz uniemożliwiaÄ kooperacjÄ. Microsoft jest najwiÄkszym
przedsiÄbiorstwem rozwijajÄ
cym takie oprogramowanie, ale wiele innych
firm traktuje wolnoÅÄ użytkowników w równie zÅy sposób; jeÅli nie
@@ -107,7 +107,7 @@
Copyright © 2000, 2007, 2008 Free Software Foundation, Inc.,
</p>
<address>51 Franklin St, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110, USA</address>
-<p>Ten utwór jest dostÄpny na <a rel="license"
+<p>Ten utwór jest dostÄpny na <a rel="license"
href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/us/deed.pl";>licencji
Creative Commons Uznanie autorstwa-Bez utworów zależnych 3.0 Stany
Zjednoczone</a>.
@@ -118,12 +118,14 @@
<!--TRANSLATORS: Use space (SPC) as msgstr if you don't want credits.-->
TÅumaczenie: JarosÅaw MoszczyÅski 2004; poprawki: Wojciech Kotwica 2006, Jan
-Owoc 2011, Daniel Oźminkowski 2010, Jan Wieremjewicz 2010.</div>
+Owoc 2011, 2012, Daniel Oźminkowski 2010, Jan Wieremjewicz 2010.</div>
+
+
<p>
<!-- timestamp start -->
Aktualizowane:
-$Date: 2011/09/20 17:15:32 $
+$Date: 2012/01/07 01:27:02 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
@@ -149,6 +151,7 @@
<!-- Please use W3C normative character entities -->
<!-- -->
<!-- <gnun>
+
<ul class="translations-list"> -->
<!-- Catalan -->
<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/microsoft-verdict.ca.html">Català</a> [ca]</li>
-->
@@ -172,7 +175,8 @@
<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/microsoft-verdict.pl.html">polski</a> [pl]</li> -->
<!-- Russian -->
<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/microsoft-verdict.ru.html">русский</a> [ru]</li>
-->
-<!-- </ul></gnun> -->
+<!-- </ul>
+</gnun> -->
<!-- </div>
-->
</div>
Index: philosophy/no-word-attachments.es.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/no-word-attachments.es.html,v
retrieving revision 1.22
retrieving revision 1.23
diff -u -b -r1.22 -r1.23
--- philosophy/no-word-attachments.es.html 20 Sep 2011 17:15:37 -0000
1.22
+++ philosophy/no-word-attachments.es.html 7 Jan 2012 01:27:02 -0000
1.23
@@ -159,6 +159,12 @@
<hr />
<p>
+(Nota aclaratoria: también puedo manipular ODF, pero no me es muy
+conveniente, asà que no lo incluyo en mi lista de sugerencias.)</p>
+
+<hr />
+
+<p>
<em>Me envió el archivo adjunto en formato Microsoft Word, un formato
privativo y secreto, por lo que me es muy difÃcil de leer. Si me envÃa el
mismo en texto plano, HTML o PDF lo leeré.</em></p>
@@ -183,8 +189,20 @@
utilizar software de Microsoft y contribuye a negarles cualquier otra
opción. En efecto, se convierte en un pilar para el monopolio que dicha
compañÃa trata de imponer, y ello supone un gran obstáculo de cara a la
-adopción mayoritaria del software libre. ¿Por favor, podrÃa usar otra forma
-de mandar la información en lugar de Microsoft Word?</em></p>
+adopción mayoritaria del software libre.</em></p>
+
+<p>
+<em>¿Por favor, podrÃa usar otra forma de mandar la información en lugar de
+Microsoft Word?</em></p>
+
+<p>
+<em>Microsoft ya ha empezado a hacer que los usuarios de Word migren a una
+nueva versión del formato de Word, basado en OOXML. Sus especificaciones
+tienen 6.000 páginas, tan complejas que probablemente nadie más las podrá
+implementar nunca, y Microsoft podrá demandarle por infracción de patentes
+si lo intenta. Si no desea unirse a este ataque contra la interoperabilidad,
+la forma de evitarlo es decidir no usar el formato Word para el
+intercambio.</em></p>
<p>
<em>Convertir el documento a formato HTML desde Word es bastante
@@ -311,6 +329,7 @@
<!--TRANSLATORS: Use space (SPC) as msgstr if you don't want credits.-->
</div>
+
<p>
Para informarse de <a
href="http://gnu.org/server/standards/translations/es/#ayudar";><em>cómo
traducir al
español o enviar correcciones</em></a> de esta traducción visite el sitio web
@@ -320,7 +339,7 @@
<!-- timestamp start -->
Ãltima actualización:
-$Date: 2011/09/20 17:15:37 $
+$Date: 2012/01/07 01:27:02 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
@@ -346,41 +365,58 @@
<!-- use the 3-letter ISO 639-2. -->
<!-- Please use W3C normative character entities. -->
<!-- -->
-<!-- <gnun>
-<ul class="translations-list"> -->
+<!-- <ul class="translations-list">
+ -->
<!-- Bosnian -->
-<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/no-word-attachments.bs.html">bosanski</a> [bs]</li> -->
+<!-- <li>
+<a href="/philosophy/no-word-attachments.bs.html">bosanski</a> [bs]</li>
-->
<!-- Czech -->
-<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/no-word-attachments.cs.html">Česky</a> [cs]</li>
-->
+<!-- <li>
+<a
href="/philosophy/no-word-attachments.cs.html">Česky</a> [cs]</li>
-->
<!-- Danish -->
-<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/no-word-attachments.da.html">dansk</a> [da]</li> -->
+<!-- <li>
+<a href="/philosophy/no-word-attachments.da.html">dansk</a> [da]</li> -->
<!-- German -->
-<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/no-word-attachments.de.html">Deutsch</a> [de]</li> -->
+<!-- <li>
+<a href="/philosophy/no-word-attachments.de.html">Deutsch</a> [de]</li>
-->
<!-- English -->
-<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html">English</a> [en]</li> -->
+<!-- <li>
+<a href="/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html">English</a> [en]</li> -->
<!-- Spanish -->
-<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/no-word-attachments.es.html">español</a> [es]</li>
-->
+<!-- <li>
+<a
href="/philosophy/no-word-attachments.es.html">español</a> [es]</li>
-->
<!-- Farsi (Persian) -->
-<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/no-word-attachments.fa.html">فارسی</a> [fa]</li>
-->
+<!-- <li>
+<a
href="/philosophy/no-word-attachments.fa.html">فارسی</a> [fa]</li>
-->
<!-- French -->
-<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/no-word-attachments.fr.html">français</a> [fr]</li>
-->
+<!-- <li>
+<a
href="/philosophy/no-word-attachments.fr.html">français</a> [fr]</li>
-->
<!-- Hebrew -->
-<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/no-word-attachments.he.html">עברית</a> [he]</li>
-->
+<!-- <li>
+<a
href="/philosophy/no-word-attachments.he.html">עברית</a> [he]</li>
-->
<!-- Italian -->
-<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/no-word-attachments.it.html">italiano</a> [it]</li> -->
+<!-- <li>
+<a href="/philosophy/no-word-attachments.it.html">italiano</a> [it]</li>
-->
<!-- Dutch -->
-<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/no-word-attachments.nl.html">Nederlands</a> [nl]</li> -->
+<!-- <li>
+<a
href="/philosophy/no-word-attachments.nl.html">Nederlands</a> [nl]</li> -->
<!-- Norwegian (bokmål) -->
-<!-- <li><a href="/philosophy/no-word-attachments.nb.html">norsk
(bokmål)</a> [nb]</li> -->
+<!-- <li>
+<a href="/philosophy/no-word-attachments.nb.html">norsk
(bokmål)</a> [nb]</li> -->
<!-- Polish -->
-<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/no-word-attachments.pl.html">polski</a> [pl]</li> -->
+<!-- <li>
+<a href="/philosophy/no-word-attachments.pl.html">polski</a> [pl]</li> -->
<!-- Brazilian Portugese -->
-<!-- <li><a href="/philosophy/no-word-attachments.pt-br.html">português
do Brasil</a> [pt-br]</li> -->
+<!-- <li>
+<a href="/philosophy/no-word-attachments.pt-br.html">português do
Brasil</a> [pt-br]</li> -->
<!-- Romanian -->
-<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/no-word-attachments.ro.html">română</a> [ro]</li>
-->
+<!-- <li>
+<a
href="/philosophy/no-word-attachments.ro.html">română</a> [ro]</li>
-->
<!-- Russian -->
-<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/no-word-attachments.ru.html">русский</a> [ru]</li>
-->
-<!-- </ul></gnun> -->
+<!-- <li>
+<a
href="/philosophy/no-word-attachments.ru.html">русский</a> [ru]</li>
-->
+<!-- </ul>
+ -->
<!-- </div>
-->
</div>
Index: philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.es.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.es.html,v
retrieving revision 1.30
retrieving revision 1.31
diff -u -b -r1.30 -r1.31
--- philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.es.html 20 Sep 2011 17:15:38
-0000 1.30
+++ philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.es.html 7 Jan 2012 01:27:02
-0000 1.31
@@ -146,10 +146,11 @@
código».</p>
<p>El <span style="font-style:italic;">New York Times</span> <a
-href="http://www.nytimes.com/external/gigaom/2009/02/07/07gigaom-the-brave-new-world-of-open-source-game-design-37415.html";>extendió
-el término</a> para referirse a las pruebas de usuarios, permitir a unos
-cuantos usuarios probar una versión inicial y que den sus impresiones de
-forma confidencial, lo que los programadores de software privativo han
+href="http://www.nytimes.com/external/gigaom/2009/02/07/07gigaom-the-brave-new-world-of-open-source-game-design-37415.html";>publicó
+un artÃculo que amplió el significado de la palabra</a> para referirse a las
+pruebas de los programas beta por parte de los usuarios (permitiendo a unos
+cuantos usuarios probar una versión inicial para que den sus impresiones de
+forma conficendial), hecho que los programadores de software privativo han
realizado durante décadas.</p>
<p>Los partidarios del código abierto intentan lidiar con este problema
@@ -372,6 +373,7 @@
<!--TRANSLATORS: Use space (SPC) as msgstr if you don't want credits.-->
</div>
+
<p>
Para informarse de <a
href="http://gnu.org/server/standards/translations/es/#ayudar";><em>cómo
traducir al
español o enviar correcciones</em></a> de esta traducción visite el sitio web
@@ -381,7 +383,7 @@
<!-- timestamp start -->
Ãltima actualización:
-$Date: 2011/09/20 17:15:38 $
+$Date: 2012/01/07 01:27:02 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
@@ -398,6 +400,7 @@
Translations of this page</h4> -->
<!-- -->
<!-- <gnun>
+
<ul class="translations-list"> -->
<!-- Arabic -->
<!-- <li><a hreflang="ar"
href="/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.ar.html">العربية</a> [ar]</li>
-->
@@ -431,7 +434,8 @@
<!-- <li><a hreflang="ta"
href="/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.ta.html">தமிழ்</a> [ta]</li>
-->
<!-- Turkish -->
<!-- <li><a hreflang="tr"
href="/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.tr.html">Türkçe</a> [tr]</li>
-->
-<!-- </ul></gnun> -->
+<!-- </ul>
+</gnun> -->
<!-- </div>
-->
</div>
Index: philosophy/philosophy.pl.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/philosophy.pl.html,v
retrieving revision 1.171
retrieving revision 1.172
diff -u -b -r1.171 -r1.172
--- philosophy/philosophy.pl.html 22 Dec 2011 17:26:42 -0000 1.171
+++ philosophy/philosophy.pl.html 7 Jan 2012 01:27:03 -0000 1.172
@@ -36,21 +36,21 @@
<!-- (e.g. foo.fr.html) from here. It would be better to link them -->
<!-- from philosophy.fr.html and the original documents. -mhatta -->
<ul>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/free-sw.pl.html">Czym jest Wolne
Oprogramowanie?</a></li>
- <li><a href="/gnu/gnu.pl.html">Historia GNU/Linuksa</a></li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/why-free.pl.html">Dlaczego oprogramowanie nie
powinno
-mieÄ wÅaÅcicieli</a></li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/pragmatic.pl.html">Copyleft: Pragmatyczny
Idealizm</a></li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/free-doc.pl.html">Wolne oprogramowanie i wolna
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/free-sw.html">Czym jest Wolne
Oprogramowanie?</a></li>
+ <li><a href="/gnu/gnu.html">Historia GNU/Linuksa</a></li>
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/why-free.html">Dlaczego oprogramowanie nie powinno
mieÄ
+wÅaÅcicieli</a></li>
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/pragmatic.html">Copyleft: Pragmatyczny
Idealizm</a></li>
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/free-doc.html">Wolne oprogramowanie i wolna
dokumentacja</a></li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/selling.pl.html">Sprzedaż wolnego
oprogramowania</a>
-jest w porzÄ
dku!</li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/fs-motives.pl.html">Motywacje do pisania
wolnego
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/selling.html">Sprzedaż wolnego oprogramowania</a>
jest
+w porzÄ
dku!</li>
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/fs-motives.html">Motywacje do pisania wolnego
oprogramowania</a></li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/right-to-read.pl.html">Prawo do czytania
—
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/right-to-read.html">Prawo do czytania —
krótkie opowiadanie antyutopijne</a> autorstwa <a
href="http://www.stallman.org/";>Richarda Stallmana</a></li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.pl.html">Dlaczego
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html">Dlaczego
„otwartemu oprogramowaniu” umyka idea wolnego
oprogramowania</a></li>
<li><a href="/philosophy/government-free-software.html">Co mogÄ
rzÄ
dy
robiÄ
aby promowaÄ wolne oprogramowanie</a></li>
@@ -64,7 +64,7 @@
<!-- have the URLs bookmarked or on their pages. -len -->
<a id="TOCFreedomOrganizations">My</a> <a
id="FreedomOrganizations">także</a> mamy listÄ <a
-href="/links/links.pl.html#FreedomOrganizations">organizacji pracujÄ
cych
+href="/links/links.html#FreedomOrganizations">organizacji pracujÄ
cych
na rzecz wolnoÅci w rozwoju komputerów i komunikacji
elektronicznej</a>.</p>
@@ -115,14 +115,14 @@
<!--TRANSLATORS: Use space (SPC) as msgstr if you don't want credits.-->
TÅumaczenie: Jan Owoc 2010; poprawki: Jan Wieremjewicz 2010, Oskar GaÅecki
-2010, Jan Owoc 2011.</div>
+2010, Jan Owoc 2011, 2012.</div>
<p>
<!-- timestamp start -->
Aktualizowane:
-$Date: 2011/12/22 17:26:42 $
+$Date: 2012/01/07 01:27:03 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
Index: philosophy/pragmatic.pl.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/pragmatic.pl.html,v
retrieving revision 1.30
retrieving revision 1.31
diff -u -b -r1.30 -r1.31
--- philosophy/pragmatic.pl.html 20 Sep 2011 17:15:44 -0000 1.30
+++ philosophy/pragmatic.pl.html 7 Jan 2012 01:27:03 -0000 1.31
@@ -150,9 +150,9 @@
nastÄpca – Open Group). Finansowani przez firmy wytwarzajÄ
ce
programy prawnie zastrzeżone, starali siÄ przez dekadÄ przekonaÄ
programistów, by zrezygnowali z copyleft. Obecnie, gdy Open Group <a
-href="/philosophy/x.pl.html">uczyniÅa X11R6.4 oprogramowaniem, które nie
-jest już wolne</a>, ci z nas którzy oparli siÄ tej pokusie sÄ
-szczÄÅliwi, że to zrobili.</p>
+href="/philosophy/x.html">uczyniÅa X11R6.4 oprogramowaniem, które nie jest
+już wolne</a>, ci z nas którzy oparli siÄ tej pokusie sÄ
szczÄÅliwi,
+że to zrobili.</p>
<p>
[We wrzeÅniu 1998, kilka miesiÄcy po opublikowaniu X11R6.4
na warunkach czyniÄ
cych zeŠoprogramowanie, które nie jest wolne, Open
@@ -210,7 +210,7 @@
<p>
Copyright © 1998, 2003, 2010 Free Software Foundation, Inc.</p>
-<p>Ten utwór jest dostÄpny na <a rel="license"
+<p>Ten utwór jest dostÄpny na <a rel="license"
href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/us/deed.pl";>licencji
Creative Commons Uznanie autorstwa-Bez utworów zależnych 3.0 Stany
Zjednoczone</a>.
@@ -222,11 +222,13 @@
<!--TRANSLATORS: Use space (SPC) as msgstr if you don't want credits.-->
TÅumaczenie: MikoÅaj Sitarz 2001, Daniel Oźminkowski 2010; poprawki Jan Owoc
2010, 2011.</div>
+
+
<p>
<!-- timestamp start -->
Aktualizowane:
-$Date: 2011/09/20 17:15:44 $
+$Date: 2012/01/07 01:27:03 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
@@ -258,6 +260,7 @@
<!-- Please use W3C normative character entities. -->
<!-- -->
<!-- <gnun>
+
<ul class="translations-list"> -->
<!-- Arabic -->
<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/pragmatic.ar.html">العربية</a> [ar]</li>
-->
@@ -299,7 +302,8 @@
<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/pragmatic.ru.html">русский</a> [ru]</li>
-->
<!-- Turkish -->
<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/pragmatic.tr.html">Türkçe</a> [tr]</li> -->
-<!-- </ul></gnun> -->
+<!-- </ul>
+</gnun> -->
<!-- </div>
-->
</div>
Index: philosophy/why-free.pl.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/why-free.pl.html,v
retrieving revision 1.26
retrieving revision 1.27
diff -u -b -r1.26 -r1.27
--- philosophy/why-free.pl.html 20 Sep 2011 17:15:55 -0000 1.26
+++ philosophy/why-free.pl.html 7 Jan 2012 01:27:03 -0000 1.27
@@ -374,7 +374,7 @@
<p>
Copyright © 1994, 2009 Richard Stallman
<br />
-Ten utwór jest dostÄpny na <a rel="license"
+Ten utwór jest dostÄpny na <a rel="license"
href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/us/deed.pl";>licencji
Creative Commons Uznanie autorstwa-Bez utworów zależnych 3.0 Stany
Zjednoczone</a>.
@@ -385,10 +385,12 @@
<!--TRANSLATORS: Use space (SPC) as msgstr if you don't want credits.-->
TÅumaczenie: Wojciech Kotwica 2002; poprawki Marcin Wolak, Jan Owoc
2010.</div>
+
+
<p><!-- timestamp start -->
Aktualizowane:
-$Date: 2011/09/20 17:15:55 $
+$Date: 2012/01/07 01:27:03 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
@@ -419,6 +421,7 @@
<!-- -->
<!-- -->
<!-- <gnun>
+
<ul class="translations-list"> -->
<!-- Arabic -->
<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/why-free.ar.html">العربية</a> [ar]</li>
-->
@@ -470,7 +473,8 @@
<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/why-free.ta.html">தமிழ்</a> [ta]</li>
-->
<!-- Turkish -->
<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/why-free.tr.html">Türkçe</a> [tr]</li> -->
-<!-- </ul></gnun> -->
+<!-- </ul>
+</gnun> -->
<!-- </div>
-->
</div>
Index: philosophy/po/essays-and-articles.pl-en.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/po/essays-and-articles.pl-en.html,v
retrieving revision 1.2
retrieving revision 1.3
diff -u -b -r1.2 -r1.3
--- philosophy/po/essays-and-articles.pl-en.html 5 Jan 2012 17:29:07
-0000 1.2
+++ philosophy/po/essays-and-articles.pl-en.html 7 Jan 2012 01:27:11
-0000 1.3
@@ -459,7 +459,7 @@
<p>
Updated:
<!-- timestamp start -->
-$Date: 2012/01/05 17:29:07 $
+$Date: 2012/01/07 01:27:11 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
</div>
Index: philosophy/po/philosophy.pl-en.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/po/philosophy.pl-en.html,v
retrieving revision 1.2
retrieving revision 1.3
diff -u -b -r1.2 -r1.3
--- philosophy/po/philosophy.pl-en.html 22 Dec 2011 17:26:50 -0000 1.2
+++ philosophy/po/philosophy.pl-en.html 7 Jan 2012 01:27:11 -0000 1.3
@@ -100,7 +100,7 @@
<p>
Updated:
<!-- timestamp start -->
-$Date: 2011/12/22 17:26:50 $
+$Date: 2012/01/07 01:27:11 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
</div>
Index: philosophy/po/pragmatic.translist
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/po/pragmatic.translist,v
retrieving revision 1.2
retrieving revision 1.3
diff -u -b -r1.2 -r1.3
--- philosophy/po/pragmatic.translist 25 Dec 2011 05:18:08 -0000 1.2
+++ philosophy/po/pragmatic.translist 7 Jan 2012 01:27:12 -0000 1.3
@@ -2,21 +2,21 @@
<div id="translations">
<ul class="translations-list">
<!-- Arabic -->
-<li><a
href="/philosophy/pragmatic.ar.html">العربية</a> [ar]</li>
+<li><a href="/philosophy/pragmatic.ar.html">اÙعربÙØ©</a> [ar]</li>
<!-- Bulgarian -->
-<li><a
href="/philosophy/pragmatic.bg.html">български</a> [bg]</li>
+<li><a
href="/philosophy/pragmatic.bg.html">бÑлгаÑÑки</a> [bg]</li>
<!-- Catalan -->
-<li><a href="/philosophy/pragmatic.ca.html">català</a> [ca]</li>
+<li><a href="/philosophy/pragmatic.ca.html">català </a> [ca]</li>
<!-- German -->
<li><a href="/philosophy/pragmatic.de.html">Deutsch</a> [de]</li>
<!-- English -->
<li><a href="/philosophy/pragmatic.en.html">English</a> [en]</li>
<!-- Spanish -->
-<li><a href="/philosophy/pragmatic.es.html">español</a> [es]</li>
+<li><a href="/philosophy/pragmatic.es.html">español</a> [es]</li>
<!-- Farsi (Persian) -->
-<li><a
href="/philosophy/pragmatic.fa.html">فارسی</a> [fa]</li>
+<li><a href="/philosophy/pragmatic.fa.html">ÙارسÛ</a> [fa]</li>
<!-- French -->
-<li><a href="/philosophy/pragmatic.fr.html">français</a> [fr]</li>
+<li><a href="/philosophy/pragmatic.fr.html">français</a> [fr]</li>
<!-- Hungarian -->
<li><a href="/philosophy/pragmatic.hu.html">magyar</a> [hu]</li>
<!-- Indonesian -->
@@ -24,23 +24,23 @@
<!-- Italian -->
<li><a href="/philosophy/pragmatic.it.html">italiano</a> [it]</li>
<!-- Japanese -->
-<li><a
href="/philosophy/pragmatic.ja.html">日本語</a> [ja]</li>
+<li><a href="/philosophy/pragmatic.ja.html">æ¥æ¬èª</a> [ja]</li>
<!-- Korean -->
-<li><a
href="/philosophy/pragmatic.ko.html">한국어</a> [ko]</li>
+<li><a href="/philosophy/pragmatic.ko.html">íêµì´</a> [ko]</li>
<!-- Malayalam -->
-<li><a
href="/philosophy/pragmatic.ml.html">മലയാളം</a> [ml]</li>
+<li><a
href="/philosophy/pragmatic.ml.html">മലയാളà´</a> [ml]</li>
<!-- Dutch -->
<li><a href="/philosophy/pragmatic.nl.html">Nederlands</a> [nl]</li>
<!-- Polish -->
<li><a href="/philosophy/pragmatic.pl.html">polski</a> [pl]</li>
<!-- Brazilian Portuguese -->
-<li><a href="/philosophy/pragmatic.pt-br.html">português do
Brasil</a> [pt-br]</li>
+<li><a href="/philosophy/pragmatic.pt-br.html">português do
Brasil</a> [pt-br]</li>
<!-- Romanian -->
-<li><a
href="/philosophy/pragmatic.ro.html">română</a> [ro]</li>
+<li><a href="/philosophy/pragmatic.ro.html">românÄ</a> [ro]</li>
<!-- Russian -->
-<li><a
href="/philosophy/pragmatic.ru.html">русский</a> [ru]</li>
+<li><a href="/philosophy/pragmatic.ru.html">ÑÑÑÑкий</a> [ru]</li>
<!-- Turkish -->
-<li><a
href="/philosophy/pragmatic.tr.html">Türkçe</a> [tr]</li>
+<li><a href="/philosophy/pragmatic.tr.html">Türkçe</a> [tr]</li>
</ul>
</div> <!-- id="translations" -->
<!-- end translinks file -->
Index: licenses/po/licenses.es-en.html
===================================================================
RCS file: licenses/po/licenses.es-en.html
diff -N licenses/po/licenses.es-en.html
--- /dev/null 1 Jan 1970 00:00:00 -0000
+++ licenses/po/licenses.es-en.html 7 Jan 2012 01:26:55 -0000 1.1
@@ -0,0 +1,441 @@
+<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" -->
+<title>Licenses - GNU Project - Free Software Foundation (FSF)</title>
+<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" -->
+<!--#include virtual="/licenses/po/licenses.translist" -->
+<h2>Licenses</h2>
+
+<p>
+Published software should be <a href="/philosophy/free-sw.html">free
+software</a>. To make it free software, you need to release it
+under a free software license. We normally use the <a
+href="#GPL">GNU General Public License</a> (GNU GPL),
+but occasionally we use <a
href="/licenses/license-list.html#SoftwareLicenses">other
+free software licenses</a>. We use only licenses that are compatible
+with the GNU GPL for GNU software.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Documentation for free software should be
+<a href="/philosophy/free-doc.html">free documentation</a>, so that
+people can redistribute it and improve it along with the software
+it describes. To make it free documentation, you need to release
+it under a free documentation license. We normally use the
+<a href="#FDL">GNU Free Documentation License</a> (GNU
+FDL), but occasionally we use
+<a href="/licenses/license-list.html#DocumentationLicenses">other free
+documentation licenses</a>.
+</p>
+
+<p>If you've started a new project and you're not sure what license to
+use, <a href="/licenses/license-recommendations.html">“How to
+choose a license for your own work”</a> details our
+recommendations in an easy-to-follow guide. If you just want a quick
+list reference, we have a page that names
+our <a href="/licenses/recommended-copylefts.html">recommended
+copyleft licenses</a>.</p>
+
+<p>
+Our documentation licenses are currently being revised, and we welcome
+your comments on the proposed texts. Please
+visit <a href="http://gplv3.fsf.org";>our license update site</a> to
+read the current drafts and participate in the process.
+</p>
+
+<h3>Common Resources for our Software Licenses</h3>
+
+<p>We have a number of resources to help people understand and use our
+various licenses:</p>
+
+<ul>
+
+ <li><a href="/licenses/gpl-faq.html">Frequently Asked
+ Questions about the GNU licenses</a></li>
+ <li><a href="/licenses/gpl-howto.html">How to use GNU licenses for your
+ own software</a></li>
+ <li><a href="/licenses/gpl-violation.html">What to do if you see a
+ violation of a GNU license</a></li>
+ <li><a href="/philosophy/university.html">Releasing Free Software if
+ you work at a university</a></li>
+ <li><a href="/licenses/why-assign.html">Why the FSF gets copyright
+ assignments from contributors</a></li>
+ <li><a href="/graphics/license-logos.html">GNU license logos</a> to use
+ with your project</li>
+ <li><a
+href="/licenses/license-list.html#LicensingMailingList"><address@hidden>
+mailing list</a> for general licensing help
+ </li>
+
+</ul>
+
+<h3 id="GPL">The GNU General Public License</h3>
+
+<p>
+The GNU General Public License is often called the GNU GPL for short;
+it is used by most GNU programs, and by more than half of all free
+software packages. The latest version is version 3.
+</p>
+
+<ul>
+ <li>The GNU General Public License is available in these formats:
+ <a href="/licenses/gpl.html">HTML</a>,
+ <a href="/licenses/gpl.txt">plain text</a>,
+ <a href="/licenses/gpl.odt">ODF</a>,
+ <a href="/licenses/gpl.dbk">Docbook</a>,
+ <a href="/licenses/gpl.texi">Texinfo</a>, and
+ <a href="/licenses/gpl.tex">LaTeX</a>.
+These documents are not formatted for standalone publishing, and
+are intended to be included in another document.</li>
+ <li><a href="/licenses/quick-guide-gplv3.html">A Quick Guide to
+ GPLv3</a></li>
+ <li><a href="/licenses/old-licenses/old-licenses.html#GPL">Older
+ versions of the GNU GPL</a></li>
+</ul>
+
+<h3 id="LGPL">The GNU Lesser General Public License</h3>
+
+<p>
+The GNU Lesser General Public License is used by a few (not by any means
+all) GNU libraries. The latest version is version 3.
+</p>
+
+<ul>
+ <li>The GNU Lesser General Public License text is available in
+ these formats:
+ <a href="/licenses/lgpl.html">HTML</a>,
+ <a href="/licenses/lgpl.txt">plain text</a>,
+ <a href="/licenses/lgpl.dbk">Docbook</a>, and
+ <a href="/licenses/lgpl.texi">Texinfo</a>.
+These documents are not formatted for standalone publishing, and
+are intended to be included in another document.</li>
+ <li><a href="/licenses/why-not-lgpl.html">Why you shouldn't use
+ the Lesser GPL for your next library</a></li>
+ <li><a href="/licenses/old-licenses/old-licenses.html#GPL">Older
+ versions of the GNU LGPL</a></li>
+</ul>
+
+<h3 id="AGPL">The GNU Affero General Public License</h3>
+
+<p>
+The GNU Affero General Public License is based on the GNU GPL, but has an
+additional term to allow users who interact with the licensed software over
+a network to receive the source for that program. We recommend that people
+consider using the GNU AGPL for any software which will commonly be run
+over a network. The latest version is version 3.
+</p>
+
+<ul>
+ <li>The GNU Affero General Public License text is available in
+ these formats:
+ <a href="/licenses/agpl.html">HTML</a>,
+ <a href="/licenses/agpl.txt">plain text</a>,
+ <a href="/licenses/agpl.dbk">Docbook</a>,
+ <a href="/licenses/agpl.texi">Texinfo</a>, and
+ <a href="/licenses/agpl.tex">LaTeX</a>.
+These documents are not formatted for standalone publishing, and
+are intended to be included in another document.</li>
+ <li><a href="/licenses/why-affero-gpl.html">Why the Affero GPL</a></li>
+</ul>
+
+<h3 id="FDL">The GNU Free Documentation License</h3>
+
+<p>
+The GNU Free Documentation License 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 non-commercially. The latest version
+is 1.3.
+</p>
+
+<ul>
+ <li>The GNU Free Documentation License text is available in these formats:
+ <a href="/licenses/fdl.html">HTML</a>,
+ <a href="/licenses/fdl.txt">plain text</a>,
+ <a href="/licenses/fdl.xml">Docbook</a>,
+ <a href="/licenses/fdl.texi">Texinfo</a>, and
+ <a href="/licenses/fdl.tex">LaTeX</a>.
+These documents are not formatted for standalone publishing, and
+are intended to be included in another document.</li>
+ <li><a href="/licenses/why-gfdl.html">Why publishers should use
+ the GNU FDL</a></li>
+ <li><a href="/licenses/fdl.html#addendum">How to use
+ the GNU FDL for your documentation</a></li>
+ <li><a href="/licenses/fdl-howto.html">Tips on using the GNU FDL</a></li>
+ <li><a href="/licenses/fdl-howto-opt.html">How to use the optional
+ features of the GNU FDL</a></li>
+ <li><a href="/licenses/old-licenses/old-licenses.html#FDL">
+ Older versions of the GNU FDL</a></li>
+</ul>
+
+<h3 id="Exceptions">Exceptions to GNU Licenses</h3>
+
+<p>Some GNU programs have additional permissions or special exceptions
+ to specific terms in one of the main licenses. Since some of those
+ are commonly used or inspire a lot of questions on their own, we've
+ started collecting them on
+ our <a href="/licenses/exceptions.html">exceptions page</a>.</p>
+
+<h3 id="LicenseURLs">License URLs</h3>
+
+<p>When linking to our licenses, it's usually best to link to the latest
+version; hence the standard URLs such as
+<tt>http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html</tt> have no version number.
+Occasionally, however, you may want to link to a specific version of a
+given license. In those situations, you can use the following links
+[<a href="#urlskip">skip links</a>]:</p>
+
+<dl>
+<dt>GNU General Public License (GPL)</dt>
+<!-- Please keep these links absolute. I'm depending on that for the
+ XSLT to generate pages on fsf.org. Thanks. -brett -->
+<dd><a href="http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.html";>GPLv3</a>,
+<a href="http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0.html";>GPLv2</a>,
+<a href="http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-1.0.html";>GPLv1</a></dd>
+
+<dt>GNU Lesser General Public License (LGPL)</dt>
+<dd><a href="http://www.gnu.org/licenses/lgpl-3.0.html";>LGPLv3</a>,
+<a href="http://www.gnu.org/licenses/lgpl-2.1.html";>LGPLv2.1</a></dd>
+
+<dt>GNU Affero General Public License (AGPL)</dt>
+<dd><a href="http://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl-3.0.html";>GNU
+ AGPLv3</a> (The <a
+ href="http://www.affero.org/oagpl.html";>Affero General
+ Public License version 1</a> is not a GNU license, but it was
+ designed to serve a purpose much like the GNU AGPL's.)</dd>
+
+<dt>GNU Free Documentation License (FDL)</dt>
+<dd><a href="http://www.gnu.org/licenses/fdl-1.3.html";>FDLv1.3</a>,
+<a href="http://www.gnu.org/licenses/fdl-1.2.html";>FDLv1.2</a>,
+<a href="http://www.gnu.org/licenses/fdl-1.1.html";>FDLv1.1</a></dd>
+</dl>
+
+<p><a name="urlskip"></a>Stable links to each license's alternative
+ formats are available on its respective page. Not every version of
+ every license is available in every format. If you need one that is
+ missing, please <a href="mailto:address@hidden";>email us</a>.</p>
+
+<p>See also the <a href="old-licenses/">old licenses page</a>.</p>
+
+
+<h3>Unofficial Translations</h3>
+
+<p>
+Legally speaking, the original (English) version of the licenses is what
+specifies the actual distribution terms for GNU programs and others that
+use them. But to help people better understand the licenses, we give
+permission to publish translations into other languages provided that
+they follow our regulations for unofficial translations:
+</p>
+
+<ul>
+ <li>
+ <a href="/licenses/translations.html">List of unofficial translations</a>
+ </li>
+ <li><a href="/licenses/translations.html#rules">How to create an unofficial
+ translation</a></li>
+</ul>
+
+<h3 id="VerbatimCopying">Verbatim Copying and Distribution</h3>
+
+<p>The standard copyright terms for GNU web pages is now the <a
+href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/us/";>Creative
+Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 United States License</a>. It used to
+be (and for a few pages still is): <em><span class="highlight">Verbatim
+copying and distribution of this entire article are permitted worldwide,
+without royalty, in any medium, provided this notice is
+preserved</span>.</em> Please note the following commentary about this
+“verbatim license” by Eben Moglen:</p>
+
+<p>
+“Our intention in using the phrase ‘verbatim copying in
+any medium’ is not to require retention of page headings and
+footers or other formatting features. Retention of weblinks in both
+hyperlinked and non-hyperlinked media (as notes or some other form of
+printed URL in non-HTML media) is required”.
+</p>
+
+<h3>List of Free Software Licenses</h3>
+
+<ul>
+ <li>
+ <a href="/licenses/license-list.html">List of Free Software Licenses</a>
+
+<p> If you are contemplating writing a new license, please contact the
+FSF by writing to <a
+href="mailto:address@hidden";><address@hidden></a>. 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
+help you can ensure that the license really is a Free Software license
+and avoid various practical problems.
+</p>
+
+ </li>
+ </ul>
+
+
+<h3 id="WhatIsCopyleft">What Is Copyleft?</h3>
+
+<p>
+<a href="/copyleft/copyleft.html"><em>Copyleft</em></a> is a general
+method for making a program free
+software and requiring all modified and extended versions of the
+program to be free software as well.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The simplest way to make a program free is to put it in the
+<a href="/philosophy/categories.html#PublicDomainSoftware">public
+domain</a>, 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
+<a href="/philosophy/categories.html#ProprietarySoftware">proprietary
+software</a>. 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 <a href="/gnu/thegnuproject.html">GNU project</a>, 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
+<a href="/philosophy/pragmatic.html">incentive</a>
+for other programmers to add to free software.
+Important free programs such as the GNU C++ compiler exist
+only because of this.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Copyleft also helps programmers who want to contribute
+<a href="/software/software.html#HelpWriteSoftware">improvements</a> to
+<a href="/philosophy/free-sw.html">free software</a> get permission to
+do that. 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
+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 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
+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'
+freedom; we use copyright to guarantee their freedom. That's why we
+reverse the name, changing “copyright” into
+“copyleft”.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Copyleft is a general concept; there are many ways to fill in the
+details. In the GNU Project, the specific distribution terms that we
+use are contained in the GNU General Public License, the GNU Lesser
+General Public License and the GNU Free Documentation License.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The appropriate license is included in many manuals and in each GNU
+source code distribution.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The GNU GPL is designed so that you can easily apply it to your own
+program if you are the copyright holder. You don't have to modify the
+GNU GPL to do this, just add notices to your program which refer
+properly to the GNU GPL. Please note that you must use the
+entire text of the GPL, if you use it. It is an integral whole, and
+partial copies are not permitted. (Likewise for the LGPL, AGPL, and FDL.)
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Using the same distribution terms for many different programs makes it
+easy to copy code between various different programs. Since they all
+have the same distribution terms, there is no need to think about
+whether the terms are compatible. The Lesser GPL includes a
+provision that lets you alter the distribution terms to the ordinary
+GPL, so that you can copy code into another program covered by the GPL.
+</p>
+
+<h3>Licenses for Other Types of Works</h3>
+
+<p>
+We believe that published software and documentation should be
+<a href="/philosophy/free-doc.html">free software and free documentation</a>.
+We recommend making all sorts of educational and reference works free
+also, using free documentation licenses such as the
+<a href="#FDL">GNU Free Documentation License</a> (GNU FDL).
+</p>
+
+<p>For essays of opinion and scientific papers, we recommend
+either the <a
+href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/us/";>Creative
+Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 United States License</a>, or the
+simple “verbatim copying only” license stated above.</p>
+
+<p>
+We don't take the position that artistic or entertainment works must
+be free, but if you want to make one free, we recommend
+the <a href="http://artlibre.org/licence/lalgb.html";>Free Art
+License</a>.</p>
+
+<!-- If needed, change the copyright block at the bottom. In general,
+ pages on the GNU web server should be under CC BY-ND 3.0 US.
+ Please do NOT change or remove this without talking
+ with the webmasters or licensing team first.
+ Please make sure the copyright date is consistent with the document
+ and that it is like this: "2001, 2002", not this: "2001-2002". -->
+</div><!-- for id="content", starts in the include above -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
+<div id="footer">
+
+<p>Please send general FSF & GNU inquiries to
+<a href="mailto:address@hidden";><address@hidden></a>.
+There are also <a href="/contact/">other ways to contact</a>
+the FSF.<br />
+Please send broken links and other corrections or suggestions to
+<a href="mailto:address@hidden";><em>address@hidden</em></a>.</p>
+
+<p>Please see the
+<a href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
+README</a> for information on coordinating and submitting
+translations of this article.</p>
+
+<p>Copyright © 2011 Free Software Foundation, Inc.</p>
+
+<p>This page is licensed under a <a rel="license"
+href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/us/";>Creative
+Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 United States License</a>.</p>
+
+<p>Updated:
+<!-- timestamp start -->
+$Date: 2012/01/07 01:26:55 $
+<!-- timestamp end -->
+</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+</body>
+</html>
Index: philosophy/po/free-software-for-freedom.pl-en.html
===================================================================
RCS file: philosophy/po/free-software-for-freedom.pl-en.html
diff -N philosophy/po/free-software-for-freedom.pl-en.html
--- /dev/null 1 Jan 1970 00:00:00 -0000
+++ philosophy/po/free-software-for-freedom.pl-en.html 7 Jan 2012 01:27:11
-0000 1.1
@@ -0,0 +1,506 @@
+<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" -->
+<title>Why “Free Software” is better than “Open
+Source” - GNU Project - Free Software Foundation (FSF)</title>
+<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" -->
+<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/free-software-for-freedom.translist" -->
+<h2>Why “Free Software” is better than “Open
Source”</h2>
+
+<!-- This document uses XHTML 1.0 Strict, but may be served as -->
+<!-- text/html. Please ensure that markup style considers -->
+<!-- appendex C of the XHTML 1.0 standard. See validator.w3.org. -->
+
+<!-- Please ensure links are consistent with Apache's MultiView. -->
+<!-- Change include statements to be consistent with the relevant -->
+<!-- language, where necessary. -->
+
+<div class="announcement">
+<blockquote><p><a
href="/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html">“Open
+Source” misses the point of Free Software</a> is an updated
+version of this article.</p></blockquote>
+</div>
+
+<p>
+While free software by any other name would give you the same
+freedom, it makes a big difference which name we use: different words
+<em>convey different ideas</em>.</p>
+
+<p>
+In 1998, some of the people in the free software community began using
+the term <a href="http://www.opensource.org/";>“open source
+software”</a> instead of <a href="/philosophy/free-sw.html">“free
+software”</a> to describe what they do. The term “open
source”
+quickly became associated with a different approach, a different
+philosophy, different values, and even a different criterion for which
+licenses are acceptable. The Free Software movement and the Open
+Source movement are today <a href="#relationship"> separate
+movements</a> with different views and goals, although we can and do
+work together on some practical projects.</p>
+
+<p>
+The fundamental difference between the two movements is in their
+values, their ways of looking at the world. For the Open Source
+movement, the issue of whether software should be open source is a
+practical question, not an ethical one. As one person put it, “Open
+source is a development methodology; free software is a social
+movement.” For the Open Source movement, non-free software is a
+suboptimal solution. For the Free Software movement, non-free
+software is a social problem and free software is the solution.</p>
+
+<h3 id="relationship">Relationship between the Free Software
+movement and Open Source movement</h3>
+
+<p>
+The Free Software movement and the Open Source movement are like two
+political camps within the free software community.</p>
+
+<p>
+Radical groups in the 1960s developed a reputation for factionalism:
+organizations split because of disagreements on details of strategy,
+and then treated each other as enemies. Or at least, such is the
+image people have of them, whether or not it was true.</p>
+
+<p>
+The relationship between the Free Software movement and the Open
+Source movement is just the opposite of that picture. We disagree on
+the basic principles, but agree more or less on the practical
+recommendations. So we can and do work together on many specific
+projects. We don't think of the Open Source movement as an enemy.
+The enemy is
+<a href="/philosophy/categories.html#ProprietarySoftware"> proprietary
+software</a>.</p>
+
+<p>
+We are not against the Open Source movement, but we don't want to be
+lumped in with them. We acknowledge that they have contributed to our
+community, but we created this community, and we want people to know
+this. We want people to associate our achievements with our values
+and our philosophy, not with theirs. We want to be heard, not
+obscured behind a group with different views. To prevent people from
+thinking we are part of them, we take pains to avoid using the word
+“open” to describe free software, or its contrary,
+“closed”, in talking about non-free software.</p>
+
+<p>
+So please mention the Free Software movement when you talk about the
+work we have done, and the software we have developed—such as the
+<a href="/gnu/linux-and-gnu.html">GNU/Linux</a> operating system.</p>
+
+<h3 id="comparison">Comparing the two terms</h3>
+
+<p>
+This rest of this article compares the two terms “free software”
and
+“open source”. It shows why the term “open source”
does not solve
+any problems, and in fact creates some.</p>
+
+<h3 id="ambiguity">Ambiguity</h3>
+
+<p>
+The term “free software” has an ambiguity problem: 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 a
+<a href="/philosophy/free-sw.html"> more precise definition of free
+software</a>, but this is not a perfect solution; it cannot completely
+eliminate the problem. An unambiguously correct term would be better,
+if it didn't have other problems.</p>
+
+<p>
+Unfortunately, all the alternatives in English have problems of their
+own. We've looked at many alternatives that people have suggested,
+but none is so clearly “right” that switching to it would be a good
+idea. Every proposed replacement for “free software” has a similar
+kind of semantic problem, or worse—and this includes “open source
+software.”</p>
+
+<p>
+The official definition of “open source software,” as published
+by the Open Source Initiative, is very close to our definition
+of free software; however, it is a little looser in some respects,
+and they have accepted a few licenses that we consider unacceptably
+restrictive of the users.
+
+However,
+the obvious meaning for the expression “open source software”
+is “You can look at
+the source code.” This is a much weaker criterion than free
+software; it includes free software, but also
+some <a href="/philosophy/categories.html#ProprietarySoftware">
+proprietary</a> programs, including Xv, and Qt under its original license
+(before the QPL).</p>
+
+<p>
+That obvious meaning for “open source” is not the meaning that its
+advocates intend. The result is that most people misunderstand
+what those advocates are advocating. Here is how writer Neal
+Stephenson defined “open source”:</p>
+
+<blockquote><p>
+Linux is “open source” software
+meaning, simply, that anyone can get copies of its source code files.
+</p></blockquote>
+
+<p>
+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 Kansas published a similar definition:
+<!-- The <a href="http://da.state.ks.us/itec/TechArchPt6ver80.pdf";> state of
+Kansas</a> published a similar definition: --></p>
+
+<blockquote><p>
+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></blockquote>
+
+<p>
+Of course, the open source people have tried to deal with this by
+publishing a precise definition for the term, just as we have done for
+“free software.”</p>
+
+<p>
+But the explanation for “free software” is simple—a
+person who has grasped the idea of “free speech, not free
+beer” will not get it wrong again. There is no such succinct
+way to explain the official meaning of “open source” and
+show clearly why the natural definition is the wrong one.</p>
+
+<h3 id="fear">Fear of Freedom</h3>
+
+<p>
+The main argument for the term “open source software” is
+that “free software” makes some people uneasy. That's
+true: talking about freedom, about ethical issues, about
+responsibilities as well as convenience, is asking people to think
+about things they might rather ignore. This can trigger discomfort,
+and some people may reject the idea for that. It does not follow that
+society would be better off if we stop talking about these things.</p>
+
+<p>
+Years ago, free software developers noticed this discomfort reaction,
+and some started exploring an approach for avoiding it. 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. The term “open source” is
+offered as a way of doing more of this—a way to be “more
+acceptable to business.” The views and values of the Open Source
+movement stem from this decision.</p>
+
+<p>
+This approach has proved effective, in its own terms. Today many
+people are switching to free software for purely practical reasons.
+That is good, as far as it goes, but that isn't all we need to do!
+Attracting users to free software is not the whole job, just the first
+step.</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, and why would users decline?
+Only if they have learned to <em>value the freedom</em> free software
+gives them, for its own sake. It is up to us to spread this
+idea—and in order to do that, we have to talk about freedom. A
+certain amount of the “keep quiet” approach to business
+can be useful for the community, but we must have plenty of freedom
+talk too.</p>
+
+<p>
+At present, we have plenty of “keep quiet”, but not enough
+freedom talk. Most people involved with free software say little
+about freedom—usually because they seek to be “more
+acceptable to business.” Software distributors especially show
+this pattern. Some
+<a href="/gnu/linux-and-gnu.html">GNU/Linux</a> operating system
+distributions add proprietary packages to the basic free system, and
+they invite users to consider this an advantage, rather than a step
+backwards from freedom.</p>
+
+<p>
+We are failing to keep up with the influx of free software users,
+failing to teach people about freedom and our community as fast as
+they enter it. This is why non-free software (which Qt was when it
+first became popular), and partially non-free operating system
+distributions, find such fertile ground. To stop using the word
+“free” now would be a mistake; we need more, not less, talk about
+freedom.</p>
+
+<p>
+If those using the term “open source” draw more users into our
+community, that is a contribution, but the rest of us will have to
+work even harder to bring the issue of freedom to those users'
+attention. We have to say, “It's free software and it gives you
+freedom!”—more and louder than ever before.</p>
+
+<h3 id="newinfeb">Would a Trademark Help?</h3>
+
+<p>
+The advocates of “open source software” tried to make it a
+trademark, saying this would enable them to prevent misuse. This
+initiative was later dropped, the term being too descriptive to
+qualify as a trademark; thus, the legal status of “open source” is
+the same as that of “free software”: there is no <em>legal</em>
+constraint on using it. I have heard reports of a number of
+companies' calling software packages “open source” even though they
+did not fit the official definition; I have observed some instances
+myself.</p>
+
+<p>
+But would it have made a big difference to use a term that is a
+trademark? Not necessarily.</p>
+
+<p>
+Companies also made announcements that give the impression that a
+program is “open source software” without explicitly saying so.
For
+example, one IBM announcement, about a program that did not fit the
+official definition, said this:</p>
+
+<blockquote><p>
+As is common in the open source community, users of the ...
+technology will also be able to collaborate with IBM ...
+</p></blockquote>
+
+<p>
+This did not actually say that the program <em>was</em> “open
+source”, but many readers did not notice that detail. (I should note
+that IBM was sincerely trying to make this program free software, and
+later adopted a new license which does make it free software and
+“open source”; but when that announcement was made, the program did
+not qualify as either one.)</p>
+
+<p>
+And here is how Cygnus Solutions, which was formed to be a free
+software company and subsequently branched out (so to speak) into
+proprietary software, advertised some proprietary software products:</p>
+
+<blockquote><p>
+Cygnus Solutions is a leader in the open source market and has just
+launched two products into the [GNU/]Linux marketplace.
+</p></blockquote>
+
+<p>
+Unlike IBM, Cygnus was not trying to make these packages free
+software, and the packages did not come close to qualifying. But
+Cygnus didn't actually say that these are “open source software”,
+they just made use of the term to give careless readers that
+impression.</p>
+
+<p>
+These observations suggest that a trademark would not have truly
+prevented the confusion that comes with the term “open source”.</p>
+
+<h3 id="newinnovember">Misunderstandings(?) of “Open Source”</h3>
+
+<p>
+The Open Source Definition is clear enough, and it is quite clear that
+the typical non-free program does not qualify. So you would think
+that “Open Source company” would mean one whose products are free
+software (or close to it), right? Alas, many companies are trying to
+give it a different meaning.</p>
+
+<p>
+At the “Open Source Developers Day” meeting in August 1998, several
+of the commercial developers invited said they intend to make only a
+part of their work free software (or “open source”). The focus of
+their business is on developing proprietary add-ons (software or
+<a href="/philosophy/free-doc.html">manuals</a>) to sell to the users of
+this free software. They ask us to regard this as legitimate, as part
+of our community, because some of the money is donated to free
+software development.</p>
+
+<p>
+In effect, these companies seek to gain the favorable cachet of
+“open source” for their proprietary software
+products—even though those are not “open source
+software”—because they have some relationship to free
+software or because the same company also maintains some free
+software. (One company founder said quite explicitly that they would
+put, into the free package they support, as little of their work as
+the community would stand for.)</p>
+
+<p>
+Over the years, many companies have contributed to free software
+development. Some of these companies primarily developed non-free
+software, but the two activities were separate; thus, we could ignore
+their non-free products, and work with them on free software projects.
+Then we could honestly thank them afterward for their free software
+contributions, without talking about the rest of what they did.</p>
+
+<p>
+We cannot do the same with these new companies, because they won't let
+us. These companies actively invite the public to lump all their
+activities together; they want us to regard their non-free software as
+favorably as we would regard a real contribution, although it is not
+one. They present themselves as “open source companies,” hoping
+that we will get a warm fuzzy feeling about them, and that we will be
+fuzzy-minded in applying it.</p>
+
+<p>
+This manipulative practice would be no less harmful if it were done
+using the term “free software.” But companies do not seem to use
+the term “free software” that way; perhaps its association with
+idealism makes it seem unsuitable. The term “open source” opened
+the door for this.</p>
+
+<p>
+At a trade show in late 1998, dedicated to the operating system often
+referred to
+as <a href="/gnu/linux-and-gnu.html">“Linux”</a>, the
+featured speaker was an executive from a prominent software company.
+He was probably invited on account of his company's decision to
+“support” that system. Unfortunately, their form of
+“support” consists of releasing non-free software that
+works with the system—in other words, using our community as a
+market but not contributing to it.</p>
+
+<p>
+He said, “There is no way we will make our product open source,
+but perhaps we will make it ‘internal’ open source. If we
+allow our customer support staff to have access to the source code,
+they could fix bugs for the customers, and we could provide a better
+product and better service.” (This is not an exact quote, as I
+did not write his words down, but it gets the gist.)</p>
+
+<p>
+People in the audience afterward told me, “He just doesn't get the
+point.” But is that so? Which point did he not get?</p>
+
+<p>
+He did not miss the point of the Open Source movement. That movement
+does not say users should have freedom, only that allowing more people
+to look at the source code and help improve it makes for faster and
+better development. The executive grasped that point completely;
+unwilling to carry out that approach in full, users included, he was
+considering implementing it partially, within the company.</p>
+
+<p>
+The point that he missed is the point that “open source” was
+designed not to raise: the point that users <em>deserve</em>
+freedom.</p>
+
+<p>
+Spreading the idea of freedom is a big job—it needs your help.
+That's why we stick to the term “free software” in the GNU
+Project, so we can help do that job. If you feel that freedom and
+community are important for their own sake—not just for the
+convenience they bring—please join us in using the term
+“free software”.</p>
+
+<hr />
+
+<p>
+Joe Barr wrote an article called
+<a href="http://www.itworld.com/LWD010523vcontrol4";>Live and
+let license</a> that gives his perspective on this issue.</p>
+
+<p>
+Lakhani and Wolf's
+<a
href="http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/sloan-school-of-management/15-352-managing-innovation-emerging-trends-spring-2005/readings/lakhaniwolf.pdf";>paper
on the
+motivation of free software developers</a> says that a considerable
+fraction are motivated by the view that software should be free. This
+was despite the fact that they surveyed the developers on SourceForge,
+a site that does not support the view that this is an ethical issue.</p>
+
+<hr />
+<h4>This essay is published
+in <a href="http://shop.fsf.org/product/free-software-free-society/";><cite>Free
+Software, Free Society: The Selected Essays of Richard
+M. Stallman</cite></a>.</h4>
+
+
+<!-- If needed, change the copyright block at the bottom. In general, -->
+<!-- all pages on the GNU web server should have the section about -->
+<!-- verbatim copying. Please do NOT remove this without talking -->
+<!-- with the webmasters first. -->
+<!-- Please make sure the copyright date is consistent with the document -->
+<!-- and that it is like this "2001, 2002" not this "2001-2002." -->
+</div><!-- for id="content", starts in the include above -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
+<div id="footer">
+
+<p>
+Please send FSF & GNU inquiries to
+<a href="mailto:address@hidden";><em>address@hidden</em></a>.
+There are also <a href="/contact/">other ways to contact</a>
+the FSF.
+<br />
+Please send broken links and other corrections (or suggestions) to
+<a href="mailto:address@hidden";><em>address@hidden</em></a>.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Please see the
+<a href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
+README</a> for information on coordinating and submitting
+translations of this article.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Copyright © 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2007 Free Software Foundation, Inc.,
+</p>
+<address>51 Franklin St, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110, USA</address>
+<p>This page is licensed under a <a rel="license"
+href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/us/";>Creative
+Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 United States License</a>.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Updated:
+<!-- timestamp start -->
+$Date: 2012/01/07 01:27:11 $
+<!-- timestamp end -->
+</p>
+</div>
+
+<!-- <div id="translations"> -->
+<!-- <h4>Translations of this page</h4> -->
+<!-- -->
+<!-- Please keep this list alphabetical. -->
+<!-- Comment what the language is for each type, i.e. de is Deutsch. -->
+<!-- If you add a new language here, please -->
+<!-- advise address@hidden and add it to -->
+<!-- - /home/www/bin/nightly-vars either TAGSLANG or WEBLANG -->
+<!-- - /home/www/html/server/standards/README.translations.html -->
+<!-- - one of the lists under the section "Translations Underway" -->
+<!-- - if there is a translation team, you also have to add an alias -->
+<!-- to mail.gnu.org:/com/mailer/aliases -->
+<!-- Please also check you have the 2 letter language code right versus -->
+<!-- <URL:http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/IG/ert/iso639.htm> -->
+<!-- Please use W3C normative character entities -->
+<!-- -->
+<!-- <ul class="translations-list"> -->
+<!-- Bulgarian -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.bg.html">български</a> [bg]</li>
-->
+<!-- Czech -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.cs.html">Česky</a> [cs]</li>
-->
+<!-- German -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.de.html">Deutsch</a> [de]</li>
-->
+<!-- English -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.html">English</a> [en]</li> -->
+<!-- Spanish -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.es.html">Español</a> [es]</li>
-->
+<!-- French -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.fr.html">Français</a> [fr]</li>
-->
+<!-- Hebrew -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.he.html">עברית</a> [he]</li>
-->
+<!-- Italian -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.it.html">Italiano</a> [it]</li>
-->
+<!-- Korean -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.ko.html">한국어</a> [ko]</li>
-->
+<!-- Polish -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.pl.html">polski</a> [pl]</li>
-->
+<!-- Romanian -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.ro.html">Română</a> [ro]</li>
-->
+<!-- Russian -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.ru.html">русский</a> [ru]</li>
-->
+<!-- Serbian -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.sr.html">Српски</a> [sr]</li>
-->
+<!-- Chinese (Simplified) -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.zh-cn.html">简体中文</a> [zh-cn]</li>
-->
+<!-- Chinese (Traditional) -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.zh-tw.html">繁體中文</a> [zh-tw]</li>
-->
+<!-- </ul> -->
+<!-- </div> -->
+</div>
+</body>
+</html>
Index: philosophy/po/microsoft-verdict.pl-en.html
===================================================================
RCS file: philosophy/po/microsoft-verdict.pl-en.html
diff -N philosophy/po/microsoft-verdict.pl-en.html
--- /dev/null 1 Jan 1970 00:00:00 -0000
+++ philosophy/po/microsoft-verdict.pl-en.html 7 Jan 2012 01:27:11 -0000
1.1
@@ -0,0 +1,151 @@
+<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" -->
+<title>On the Microsoft Verdict - GNU Project - Free Software Foundation
(FSF)</title>
+<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" -->
+<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/microsoft-verdict.translist" -->
+<h2>On the Microsoft Verdict</h2>
+
+<!-- This document uses XHTML 1.0 Strict, but may be served as -->
+<!-- text/html. Please ensure that markup style considers -->
+<!-- appendex C of the XHTML 1.0 standard. See validator.w3.org. -->
+
+<!-- Please ensure links are consistent with Apache's MultiView. -->
+<!-- Change include statements to be consistent with the relevant -->
+<!-- language, where necessary. -->
+
+<p>
+Many
+<a href="/gnu/linux-and-gnu.html">GNU/Linux</a>
+users think of the system as competition for Microsoft.
+But the Free Software Movement aims to solve a problem that is much
+bigger than Microsoft: proprietary, non-free software, designed to
+keep users helpless and prohibit cooperation. Microsoft is the
+largest developer of such software, but many other companies treat the
+users' freedom just as badly; if they have not shackled as many users
+as Microsoft, it is not for lack of trying.</p>
+<p>
+Since Microsoft is just a part of the problem, its defeat in the
+anti-trust lawsuit is not necessarily a victory for free software.
+Whether the outcome of this suit helps free software and promotes
+users' freedom depends of the specific remedies imposed on Microsoft
+by the judge.</p>
+<p>
+If the remedies are designed to enable other companies compete in
+offering proprietary, non-free software, that will do the Free World
+no particular good. Alternative possible masters is not freedom. And
+competition could lead them to do a “better” job, better
+in a narrow technical sense; then it could be harder for us to
+“compete” with them technically. We will continue to
+offer the user one thing those companies do
+not—freedom—and users who value freedom will continue to
+choose free software for that reason. But users who do not value
+freedom, and choose a system based on mere convenience, might be
+enticed away to “improved” proprietary systems.</p>
+<p>
+Splitting Microsoft into separate companies could also endanger free
+software, because these smaller companies, no longer held in check by
+the public readiness to condemn Microsoft, might see fit to attack
+free software more harshly than the present unified Microsoft does.</p>
+<p>
+I've
+<a href="/philosophy/microsoft-antitrust.html">proposed remedies</a>
+for this case that would help free software compete with Microsoft:
+for example, requiring Microsoft to publish documentation for all
+interfaces, and to use patents only for defense, not for aggression.
+These remedies would block the use of the weapons that Microsoft plans
+to use against us (according to the “Halloween documents”
+leaked from within Microsoft which spelled out how they plan to impede
+development of the GNU/Linux system).</p>
+<p>
+When we see what remedies the judge chooses, we will get an idea of
+whether the case has been helpful or harmful to the Free Software
+Movement.</p>
+
+
+<!-- If needed, change the copyright block at the bottom. In general, -->
+<!-- all pages on the GNU web server should have the section about -->
+<!-- verbatim copying. Please do NOT remove this without talking -->
+<!-- with the webmasters first. -->
+<!-- Please make sure the copyright date is consistent with the document -->
+<!-- and that it is like this "2001, 2002" not this "2001-2002." -->
+</div><!-- for id="content", starts in the include above -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
+<div id="footer">
+
+<p>
+Please send FSF & GNU inquiries to
+<a href="mailto:address@hidden";><em>address@hidden</em></a>.
+There are also <a href="/contact/">other ways to contact</a>
+the FSF.
+<br />
+Please send broken links and other corrections or suggestions to
+<a href="mailto:address@hidden";><em>address@hidden</em></a>.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Please see the
+<a href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
+README</a> for information on coordinating and submitting
+translations of this article.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Copyright © 2000, 2007, 2008 Free Software Foundation, Inc.,
+</p>
+<address>51 Franklin St, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110, USA</address>
+<p>This page is licensed under a <a rel="license"
+href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/us/";>Creative
+Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 United States License</a>.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Updated:
+<!-- timestamp start -->
+$Date: 2012/01/07 01:27:11 $
+<!-- timestamp end -->
+</p>
+</div>
+
+<!-- <div id="translations"> -->
+<!-- <h4>Translations of this page</h4> -->
+<!-- -->
+<!-- Please keep this list alphabetical. -->
+<!-- Comment what the language is for each type, i.e. de is Deutsch. -->
+<!-- If you add a new language here, please -->
+<!-- advise address@hidden and add it to -->
+<!-- - /home/www/bin/nightly-vars either TAGSLANG or WEBLANG -->
+<!-- - /home/www/html/server/standards/README.translations.html -->
+<!-- - one of the lists under the section "Translations Underway" -->
+<!-- - if there is a translation team, you also have to add an alias -->
+<!-- to mail.gnu.org:/com/mailer/aliases -->
+<!-- Please also check you have the 2 letter language code right versus -->
+<!-- <URL:http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/IG/ert/iso639.htm> -->
+<!-- Please use W3C normative character entities -->
+<!-- -->
+<!-- <ul class="translations-list"> -->
+<!-- Catalan -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/microsoft-verdict.ca.html">Català</a> [ca]</li>
-->
+<!-- Czech -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/microsoft-verdict.cs.html">Česky</a> [cs]</li> -->
+<!-- English -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/microsoft-verdict.html">English</a> [en]</li> -->
+<!-- Spanish -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/microsoft-verdict.es.html">Español</a> [es]</li>
-->
+<!-- French -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/microsoft-verdict.fr.html">Français</a> [fr]</li>
-->
+<!-- Indonesian -->
+<!-- <li><a href="/philosophy/microsoft-verdict.id.html">Bahasa
Indonesia</a> [id]</li> -->
+<!-- Italian -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/microsoft-verdict.it.html">Italiano</a> [it]</li> -->
+<!-- Korean -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/microsoft-verdict.ko.html">한국어</a> [ko]</li>
-->
+<!-- Dutch -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/microsoft-verdict.nl.html">Nederlands</a> [nl]</li> -->
+<!-- Polish -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/microsoft-verdict.pl.html">polski</a> [pl]</li> -->
+<!-- Russian -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/microsoft-verdict.ru.html">русский</a> [ru]</li>
-->
+<!-- </ul> -->
+<!-- </div> -->
+</div>
+</body>
+</html>
Index: philosophy/po/no-word-attachments.es-en.html
===================================================================
RCS file: philosophy/po/no-word-attachments.es-en.html
diff -N philosophy/po/no-word-attachments.es-en.html
--- /dev/null 1 Jan 1970 00:00:00 -0000
+++ philosophy/po/no-word-attachments.es-en.html 7 Jan 2012 01:27:11
-0000 1.1
@@ -0,0 +1,375 @@
+<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" -->
+
+<title>We Can Put an End to Word Attachments - GNU Project - Free Software
Foundation (FSF)</title>
+<meta http-equiv="keywords" content="GNU, FSF, Free Software Foundation,
Linux, general, public, license, gpl, general public license, freedom,
software, power, rights, word, attachment, word attachment, microsoft" />
+<meta http-equiv="description" content="This essay explains why Microsoft Word
attachments to email are bad, and describes what you can do to help stop this
practice." />
+
+<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" -->
+<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/no-word-attachments.translist" -->
+
+<h2>We Can Put an End to Word Attachments</h2>
+
+<p>by <strong>Richard M. Stallman</strong>
+</p>
+
+<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,
+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
+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
+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
+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
+they receive. The practice of using the secret Word format for
+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>
+
+<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>
+
+<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
+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
+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
+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.</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 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
+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. They are followed by several suggestions sent
+by other people.</p>
+
+<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
+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
+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 this page into your resume, next to links to
+other formats of the resume. Anyone hunting for a Word version of the
+resume will probably read this page.</p>
+
+<p>
+This page talks about Word attachments, since they are by far the most
+common case. However, the same issues apply with other proprietary
+formats, such as PowerPoint and Excel. Please feel free to adapt the
+replies to cover those as well, if you wish.</p>
+
+<p>
+With our numbers, simply by asking, we can make a difference.</p>
+
+<hr />
+
+<p>
+<em>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.</em></p>
+
+<p>
+<em>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?</em></p>
+
+<hr />
+
+<p>
+(Explanatory note: I can handle ODF too, but it isn't very convenient
+for me, so I don't include it in my list of suggestions.)</p>
+
+<hr />
+
+<p>
+<em>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.</em></p>
+
+<p>
+<em>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.</em></p>
+
+<p>
+<em>Receiving Word documents is bad for you because they can carry
+viruses (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macro_virus_(computing)).
+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
+http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/3154479.stm for more
+info.</em></p>
+
+<p>
+<em>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.</em></p>
+
+<p>
+<em>Would you please switch to a different way of sending files to other
+people, instead of Word format?</em></p>
+
+<p>
+<em>Microsoft is already starting to make Word users switch to a new
+version of Word format, based on OOXML. Its specs are 6000 pages
+long--so complex that probably no one else can ever implement it--and
+Microsoft can sue you for patent infringement if you try. If you
+don't wish to join in this attack against interoperability, the way to
+avoid it is by deciding not to use Word format for interchange.</em></p>
+
+<p>
+<em>To convert the file to HTML using Word is simple. Open the
+document, click on File, then Save As, and in the Save As Type strip
+box at the bottom of the box, choose HTML Document or Web Page. Then
+choose Save. 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.</em></p>
+
+<p>
+<em>To convert to plain text is almost the same—instead of HTML
+Document, choose Text Only or Text Document as the Save As
+Type.</em></p>
+
+<p>
+<em>Your computer may also have a program to convert to PDF format.
+Select File, then Print. Scroll through available printers and select
+the PDF converter. Click on the Print button and enter a name for the
+PDF file when requested.</em></p>
+
+<p>
+<em>See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html for more
+about this issue.</em></p>
+
+<hr />
+
+<p>
+Here's another approach, suggested by Bob Chassell. It requires that
+you edit it for the specific example, and it presumes you have a way
+to extract the contents and see how long they are.</p>
+
+<hr />
+
+<p>
+<em>I am puzzled. Why did you choose to send me 876,377 bytes in your
+recent message when the content is only 27,133 bytes?</em></p>
+
+<p>
+<em>You sent me five files in the non-standard, bloated .doc format that
+is Microsoft's secret, rather than in the international, public, and
+more efficient format of plain text.</em></p>
+
+<p>
+<em>Microsoft can (and did recently in Kenya and Brazil) have local
+police enforce laws that prohibit students from studying the code,
+prohibit entrepeneurs starting new companies, and prohibit
+professionals offering their services. Please don't give them your
+support.</em></p>
+
+<hr />
+
+<p>
+John D. Ramsdell suggests people discourage the use of proprietary
+attachments by making a small statement in their <kbd>.signature</kbd>
+file:</p>
+
+<hr />
+
+<p>
+<em>Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments.<br />
+See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html</em></p>
+
+<hr />
+
+<p>
+<a href="/philosophy/papadopoulos-response.html">Here is a response
+letter</a> by Alexandros Papadopoulos to an email message with a Word
+attachment.</p>
+
+<hr />
+
+<p>
+Kevin Cole of the Gallaudet University in Washington,
+DC, <a href="/philosophy/kevin-cole-response.html">sends out this
+automatic reply message</a> whenever he receives a word
+attachment. (I think it is
+better to send the responses by hand, and make it clear that you have
+done so, because people will receive them better.)</p>
+<hr />
+
+<p>
+Father Martin Sylvester
+offers <a href="/philosophy/sylvester-response.html">a more lengthy
+response</a> that adds the concept that it is a discourtesy to send
+Word attachments to a recipient when you don't know that they can read
+them.</p>
+
+</div>
+
+<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
+
+<div id="footer">
+<p>
+Please send FSF & GNU inquiries to
+<a href="mailto:address@hidden";><address@hidden></a>.
+There are also <a href="/contact/">other ways to contact</a>
+the FSF.
+<br />
+Please send broken links and other corrections or suggestions to
+<a href="mailto:address@hidden";><address@hidden></a>.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Please see the
+<a href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
+README</a> for information on coordinating and submitting
+translations of this article.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Copyright © 2002, 2007 Richard M. Stallman
+<br />
+This page is licensed under a <a rel="license"
+href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/us/";>Creative
+Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 United States License</a>.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Updated:
+<!-- timestamp start -->
+$Date: 2012/01/07 01:27:11 $
+<!-- timestamp end -->
+</p>
+</div>
+
+<!-- <div id="translations"> -->
+<!-- <h4>Translations of this page</h4> -->
+<!-- -->
+<!-- Please keep this list alphabetical by language code. -->
+<!-- Comment what the language is for each type, i.e. de is German. -->
+<!-- Write the language name in its own language (Deutsch) in the text. -->
+<!-- If you add a new language here, please -->
+<!-- advise address@hidden and add it to -->
+<!-- - /home/www/html/server/standards/README.translations.html -->
+<!-- - one of the lists under the section "Translations Underway" -->
+<!-- - if there is a translation team, you also have to add an alias -->
+<!-- to mail.gnu.org:/com/mailer/aliases -->
+<!-- Please also check you have the language code right; see: -->
+<!-- http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/php/code_list.php -->
+<!-- If the 2-letter ISO 639-1 code is not available, -->
+<!-- use the 3-letter ISO 639-2. -->
+<!-- Please use W3C normative character entities. -->
+<!-- -->
+<!-- <ul class="translations-list"> -->
+<!-- Bosnian -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/no-word-attachments.bs.html">bosanski</a> [bs]</li> -->
+<!-- Czech -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/no-word-attachments.cs.html">Česky</a> [cs]</li>
-->
+<!-- Danish -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/no-word-attachments.da.html">dansk</a> [da]</li> -->
+<!-- German -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/no-word-attachments.de.html">Deutsch</a> [de]</li> -->
+<!-- English -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html">English</a> [en]</li> -->
+<!-- Spanish -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/no-word-attachments.es.html">español</a> [es]</li>
-->
+<!-- Farsi (Persian) -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/no-word-attachments.fa.html">فارسی</a> [fa]</li>
-->
+<!-- French -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/no-word-attachments.fr.html">français</a> [fr]</li>
-->
+<!-- Hebrew -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/no-word-attachments.he.html">עברית</a> [he]</li>
-->
+<!-- Italian -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/no-word-attachments.it.html">italiano</a> [it]</li> -->
+<!-- Dutch -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/no-word-attachments.nl.html">Nederlands</a> [nl]</li> -->
+<!-- Norwegian (bokmål) -->
+<!-- <li><a href="/philosophy/no-word-attachments.nb.html">norsk
(bokmål)</a> [nb]</li> -->
+<!-- Polish -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/no-word-attachments.pl.html">polski</a> [pl]</li> -->
+<!-- Brazilian Portugese -->
+<!-- <li><a href="/philosophy/no-word-attachments.pt-br.html">português
do Brasil</a> [pt-br]</li> -->
+<!-- Romanian -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/no-word-attachments.ro.html">română</a> [ro]</li>
-->
+<!-- Russian -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/no-word-attachments.ru.html">русский</a> [ru]</li>
-->
+<!-- </ul> -->
+<!-- </div> -->
+</div>
+</body>
+</html>
Index: philosophy/po/open-source-misses-the-point.es-en.html
===================================================================
RCS file: philosophy/po/open-source-misses-the-point.es-en.html
diff -N philosophy/po/open-source-misses-the-point.es-en.html
--- /dev/null 1 Jan 1970 00:00:00 -0000
+++ philosophy/po/open-source-misses-the-point.es-en.html 7 Jan 2012
01:27:11 -0000 1.1
@@ -0,0 +1,409 @@
+<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" -->
+
+<title>Why Open Source Misses the Point of Free Software - GNU Project - Free
Software Foundation (FSF)</title>
+
+<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" -->
+<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/open-source-misses-the-point.translist"
-->
+
+<h2>Why Open Source misses the point of Free Software</h2>
+
+<p>by <strong>Richard Stallman</strong></p>
+
+<p>When we call software “free,” we mean that it respects
+the <a href="/philosophy/free-sw.html">users' essential freedoms</a>:
+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 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>
+
+<p>Tens of millions of people around the world now use free software;
+the public schools of some regions of India and Spain now teach all students to
+use the free <a href="/gnu/linux-and-gnu.html">GNU/Linux operating
+system</a>. 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>
+
+<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 <a href="/licenses/gpl.html">GNU General Public License</a> (GNU GPL) to
release them under—a
+license designed specifically to protect freedom for all users of a
+program.</p>
+
+<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>
+
+<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 to hear.
Other
+supporters flatly rejected the free software movement's ethical and
+social values. Whichever their views, when campaigning for
+open source, they neither cited nor advocated those values.
+The term “open source” quickly became associated with
+ideas and arguments 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
+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
+free software movement, free software is an ethical imperative,
+because only free software respects the users' freedom. By contrast,
+the philosophy of open source considers issues in terms of how to make
+software “better”—in a practical sense only. It
+says that nonfree 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>
+
+<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 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.</p>
+
+<h3>Common Misunderstandings of “Free Software” and
+“Open Source”</h3>
+
+<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 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>
+
+<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.”</p>
+
+<p>The <a href="http://opensource.org/docs/osd";>official definition of
+“open source software”</a> (which is published by the 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, their definition
+agrees with our definition in most cases.</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 its advocates intend, the result is that most people
+misunderstand the term. According to writer Neal Stephenson,
+“Linux is ‘open source’ software meaning, simply,
+that anyone can get copies of its source code files.” 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 Kansas published a similar definition:
+<!-- It was from http://da.state.ks.us/itec/TechArchPt6ver80.pdf, but
+that page is no longer available. --> “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>
+
+<p>The <i>New York Times</i>
+has <a
href="http://www.nytimes.com/external/gigaom/2009/02/07/07gigaom-the-brave-new-world-of-open-source-game-design-37415.html";>
+run an article that stretches the meaning of the term</a> to refer to
+user beta testing—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
+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 grasped the idea of “free speech, not free
+beer” will not get it 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>
+
+<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 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”.</p>
+
+<h3>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
+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
+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
+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>
+
+<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
+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>
+
+<h3>Powerful, Reliable Software Can Be Bad</h3>
+
+<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 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
+individuals to use is increasingly designed specifically to restrict
+them. This malicious feature is known as Digital Restrictions
+Management (DRM) (see <a
+href="http://defectivebydesign.org/";>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” 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 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.</p>
+
+<h3>Fear of Freedom</h3>
+
+<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 as
+convenience, is asking people to think about things they might 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.</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 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 source, with its purely practical values, impedes
+understanding of the deeper ideas of free software; it brings many
+people into our 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
+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 free software gives them, to value freedom in and of itself rather
+than the technical and practical convenience of specific free
+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 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
+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” 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.</p>
+
+<h3>Conclusion</h3>
+
+<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>
+
+<h4>Notes</h4>
+
+<p>
+Joe Barr's article,
+<a href="http://www.itworld.com/LWD010523vcontrol4";>“Live and
+let license,”</a> gives his perspective on this issue.</p>
+
+<p>
+Lakhani and Wolf's
+<a
href="http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/sloan-school-of-management/15-352-managing-innovation-emerging-trends-spring-2005/readings/lakhaniwolf.pdf";>paper
on the
+motivation of free software developers</a> 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 SourceForge,
+a site that does not support the view that this is an ethical issue.</p>
+
+</div>
+
+<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
+
+<div id="footer">
+<p>
+Please send FSF & GNU inquiries to
+<a href="mailto:address@hidden";><address@hidden></a>.
+There are also <a href="/contact/">other ways to contact</a>
+the FSF.
+<br />
+Please send broken links and other corrections or suggestions to
+<a href="mailto:address@hidden";><address@hidden></a>.
+</p>
+
+<p>Copyright © 2007, 2010 Richard Stallman
+<br />
+This page is licensed under a <a rel="license"
+href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/us/";>Creative
+Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 United States License</a>.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Updated:
+<!-- timestamp start -->
+$Date: 2012/01/07 01:27:11 $
+<!-- timestamp end -->
+</p>
+</div>
+<!-- All pages on the GNU web server should have the section about -->
+<!-- verbatim copying. Please do NOT remove this without talking -->
+<!-- with the webmasters first. -->
+<!-- Please make sure the copyright date is consistent with the document -->
+<!-- and that it is like this "2001, 2002" not this "2001-2002." -->
+<!-- <div id="translations"> -->
+<!-- <h4>Translations of this page</h4> -->
+<!-- -->
+<!-- <ul class="translations-list"> -->
+<!-- Arabic -->
+<!-- <li><a hreflang="ar"
href="/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.ar.html">العربية</a> [ar]</li>
-->
+<!-- Bulgarian -->
+<!-- <li><a hreflang="bg"
href="/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.bg.html">български</a> [bg]</li>
-->
+<!-- German -->
+<!-- <li><a hreflang="de"
href="/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.de.html">Deutsch</a> [de]</li>
-->
+<!-- Greek -->
+<!-- <li><a hreflang="el"
href="/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.el.html">ελληνικά</a> [el]</li>
-->
+<!-- English -->
+<!-- <li><a hreflang="en-US"
href="/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html">English</a> [en]</li>
-->
+<!-- Spanish -->
+<!-- <li><a hreflang="es"
href="/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.es.html">español</a> [es]</li>
-->
+<!-- Farsi (Persian) -->
+<!-- <li><a hreflang="fa"
href="/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.fa.html">فارسی</a> [fa]</li>
-->
+<!-- French -->
+<!-- <li><a hreflang="fr-FR"
href="/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.fr.html">français</a> [fr]</li>
-->
+<!-- Italian -->
+<!-- <li><a hreflang="it"
href="/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.it.html">italiano</a> [it]</li>
-->
+<!-- Malayalam -->
+<!-- <li><a hreflang="ml"
href="/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.ml.html">മലയാളം</a> [ml]</li>
-->
+<!-- Dutch -->
+<!-- <li><a hreflang="nl"
href="/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.nl.html">Nederlands</a> [nl]</li>
-->
+<!-- Polish -->
+<!-- <li><a hreflang="pl"
href="/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.pl.html">polski</a> [pl]</li>
-->
+<!-- Romanian -->
+<!-- <li><a hreflang="pl"
href="/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.ro.html">română</a> [ro]</li>
-->
+<!-- Russian -->
+<!-- <li><a hreflang="ru"
href="/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.ru.html">русский</a> [ru]</li>
-->
+<!-- Tamil -->
+<!-- <li><a hreflang="ta"
href="/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.ta.html">தமிழ்</a> [ta]</li>
-->
+<!-- Turkish -->
+<!-- <li><a hreflang="tr"
href="/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.tr.html">Türkçe</a> [tr]</li>
-->
+<!-- </ul> -->
+<!-- </div> -->
+</div>
+</body>
+</html>
Index: philosophy/po/pragmatic.pl-en.html
===================================================================
RCS file: philosophy/po/pragmatic.pl-en.html
diff -N philosophy/po/pragmatic.pl-en.html
--- /dev/null 1 Jan 1970 00:00:00 -0000
+++ philosophy/po/pragmatic.pl-en.html 7 Jan 2012 01:27:11 -0000 1.1
@@ -0,0 +1,264 @@
+<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" -->
+
+<title>Copyleft: Pragmatic Idealism - GNU Project - Free Software Foundation
(FSF)</title>
+
+<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" -->
+<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/pragmatic.translist" -->
+
+<h2>Copyleft: Pragmatic Idealism</h2>
+
+<p>
+by <a href="http://www.stallman.org/";><strong>Richard Stallman</strong></a></p>
+
+<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
+freedom and cooperation. I want
+to <a href="/philosophy/why-copyleft.html">encourage free software to
+spread</a>, 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
+the way it is—as a <a href="/copyleft"> copyleft</a>.
+All code added to a GPL-covered program
+must be free software, even if it is put in a separate file. I make
+my code available for use in free software, and not for use in
+proprietary software, in order to encourage other people who write
+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
+friend of mine was asked to rerelease a copylefted program under
+noncopyleft terms, and he responded more or less like this:</p>
+<blockquote><p>
+“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></blockquote>
+
+<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
+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>
+<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, MCC, starting from the 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>
+<p>
+Consider GNU Objective C. NeXT initially wanted to make this front
+end proprietary; they proposed to release it as <samp>.o</samp> 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
+to bring us more free software.</p>
+<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 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 Emacs, or 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.”</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>
+<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
+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
+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,
+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
+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
+indirectly, through free software organizations that have adopted a
+policy of catering to proprietary software. The X Consortium (and its
+successor, the 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
+<a href="/philosophy/x.html">make X11R6.4 nonfree software</a>, 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
+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>.</p>
+<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
+“hard-nosed realists” say that profit is the only
+ideal…just ignore them, and use copyleft all the same.</p>
+
+<hr />
+<h4>This essay is published
+in <a href="http://shop.fsf.org/product/free-software-free-society/";><cite>Free
+Software, Free Society: The Selected Essays of Richard
+M. Stallman</cite></a>.</h4>
+
+</div>
+
+<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
+
+<div id="footer">
+<p>
+Please send FSF & GNU inquiries to
+<a href="mailto:address@hidden";><address@hidden></a>. There are
+also <a href="/contact/">other ways to contact</a> the FSF.
+<br />
+Please send broken links and other corrections or suggestions to
+<a href="mailto:address@hidden";><address@hidden></a>.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Please see the
+<a href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
+README</a> for information on coordinating and submitting
+translations of this article.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Copyright © 1998, 2003 Free Software Foundation, Inc.</p>
+<p>This page is licensed under a <a rel="license"
+href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/us/";>Creative
+Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 United States License</a>.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Updated:
+<!-- timestamp start -->
+$Date: 2012/01/07 01:27:11 $
+<!-- timestamp end -->
+</p>
+</div>
+<!-- All pages on the GNU web server should have the section about -->
+<!-- verbatim copying. Please do NOT remove this without talking -->
+<!-- with the webmasters first. -->
+<!-- Please make sure the copyright date is consistent with the document -->
+<!-- and that it is like this "2001, 2002" not this "2001-2002." -->
+
+<!-- <div id="translations"> -->
+<!-- <h4>Translations of this page</h4> -->
+<!-- -->
+<!-- Please keep this list alphabetical by language code. -->
+<!-- Comment what the language is for each type, i.e. de is German. -->
+<!-- Write the language name in its own language (Deutsch) in the text. -->
+<!-- If you add a new language here, please -->
+<!-- advise address@hidden and add it to -->
+<!-- - /home/www/html/server/standards/README.translations.html -->
+<!-- - one of the lists under the section "Translations Underway" -->
+<!-- - if there is a translation team, you also have to add an alias -->
+<!-- to mail.gnu.org:/com/mailer/aliases -->
+<!-- Please also check you have the language code right; see: -->
+<!-- http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/php/code_list.php -->
+<!-- If the 2-letter ISO 639-1 code is not available, -->
+<!-- use the 3-letter ISO 639-2. -->
+<!-- Please use W3C normative character entities. -->
+<!-- -->
+<!-- <ul class="translations-list"> -->
+<!-- Arabic -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/pragmatic.ar.html">العربية</a> [ar]</li>
-->
+<!-- Bulgarian -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/pragmatic.bg.html">български</a> [bg]</li>
-->
+<!-- Catalan -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/pragmatic.ca.html">català</a> [ca]</li> -->
+<!-- German -->
+<!-- <li><a href="/philosophy/pragmatic.de.html">Deutsch</a> [de]</li> -->
+<!-- English -->
+<!-- <li><a href="/philosophy/pragmatic.html">English</a> [en]</li> -->
+<!-- Spanish -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/pragmatic.es.html">español</a> [es]</li> -->
+<!-- Farsi (Persian) -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/pragmatic.fa.html">فارسی</a> [fa]</li>
-->
+<!-- French -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/pragmatic.fr.html">français</a> [fr]</li> -->
+<!-- Hungarian -->
+<!-- <li><a href="/philosophy/pragmatic.hu.html">magyar</a> [hu]</li> -->
+<!-- Indonesian -->
+<!-- <li><a href="/philosophy/pragmatic.id.html">Bahasa
Indonesia</a> [id]</li> -->
+<!-- Italian -->
+<!-- <li><a href="/philosophy/pragmatic.it.html">italiano</a> [it]</li>
-->
+<!-- Japanese -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/pragmatic.ja.html">日本語</a> [ja]</li>
-->
+<!-- Korean -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/pragmatic.ko.html">한국어</a> [ko]</li>
-->
+<!-- Malayalam -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/pragmatic.ml.html">മലയാളം</a> [ml]</li>
-->
+<!-- Dutch -->
+<!-- <li><a href="/philosophy/pragmatic.nl.html">Nederlands</a> [nl]</li>
-->
+<!-- Polish -->
+<!-- <li><a href="/philosophy/pragmatic.pl.html">polski</a> [pl]</li> -->
+<!-- Brazilian Portuguese -->
+<!-- <li><a href="/philosophy/pragmatic.pt-br.html">português do
Brasil</a> [pt-br]</li> -->
+<!-- Romanian -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/pragmatic.ro.html">română</a> [ro]</li> -->
+<!-- Russian -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/pragmatic.ru.html">русский</a> [ru]</li>
-->
+<!-- Turkish -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/pragmatic.tr.html">Türkçe</a> [tr]</li> -->
+<!-- </ul> -->
+<!-- </div> -->
+</div>
+</body>
+</html>
Index: philosophy/po/why-free.pl-en.html
===================================================================
RCS file: philosophy/po/why-free.pl-en.html
diff -N philosophy/po/why-free.pl-en.html
--- /dev/null 1 Jan 1970 00:00:00 -0000
+++ philosophy/po/why-free.pl-en.html 7 Jan 2012 01:27:12 -0000 1.1
@@ -0,0 +1,433 @@
+<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" -->
+
+<title>Why Software Should Not Have Owners - GNU Project - Free Software
Foundation (FSF)</title>
+
+<meta name="Keywords" content="GNU, GNU Project, FSF, Free Software, Free
Software Foundation, Why Software Should Not Have Owners" />
+
+<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" -->
+<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/why-free.translist" -->
+
+<h2>Why Software Should Not Have Owners</h2>
+
+<p>by <a href="http://www.stallman.org/";><strong>Richard
+Stallman</strong></a></p>
+
+<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
+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
+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>
+
+<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 Software Publishers Association (SPA):</p>
+
+<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
+colleagues.</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 SPA's request) of people
+such as
+<acronym title="Massachusetts Institute of Technology">MIT</acronym>'s
+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 href="#footnote1">[1]</a></li>
+</ul>
+
+<p>
+All four practices resemble those used in the former 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 difference: the
+motive for information control in the Soviet Union was 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
+to control how we use information:</p>
+
+
+<ul>
+<li id="name-calling">Name calling.
+
+<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
+ask us to apply them anyway.</p></li>
+
+<li id="exaggeration">Exaggeration.
+
+<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
+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></li>
+
+<li id="law">The law.
+
+<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
+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
+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></li>
+
+<li id="natural-rights">Natural rights.
+
+<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
+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
+natural rights claims for two reasons.</p>
+
+<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
+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
+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 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
+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
+into the natural rights of the public—and that this can only be
+justified for the public's sake.</p></li>
+
+<li id="economics">Economics.
+
+<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
+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
+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,
+whether the software has owners or not.</p>
+
+<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.
+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
+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
+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.</p></li>
+
+</ul>
+
+<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
+lose freedom to control part of their own lives.</p>
+
+<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
+<a href="/philosophy/free-sw.html">free software</a>
+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>
+
+<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>
+
+<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, 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 Intel, Motorola, Texas
+Instruments and Analog Devices combined to fund the continued
+development of the GNU C compiler. Most GCC development is still done
+by paid developers. The GNU compiler for the Ada language was funded
+in the 90s by the 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
+listener-supported radio in the US shows it's possible to support a
+large activity without forcing each user to pay.</p>
+
+<p>
+As a computer user today, you may find yourself using a
+<a href="/philosophy/categories.html#ProprietarySoftware">proprietary</a>
+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
+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>
+
+<h4>Footnotes</h4>
+<ol>
+<li id="footnote1">The charges were subsequently dismissed.</li>
+</ol>
+
+<hr />
+<h4>This essay is published
+in <a href="http://shop.fsf.org/product/free-software-free-society/";><cite>Free
+Software, Free Society: The Selected Essays of Richard
+M. Stallman</cite></a>.</h4>
+
+</div>
+
+<!-- All pages on the GNU web server should have the section about -->
+<!-- verbatim copying. Please do NOT remove this without talking -->
+<!-- with the webmasters first. -->
+<!-- Please make sure the copyright date is consistent with the document -->
+<!-- and that it is like this "2001, 2002" not this "2001-2002." -->
+
+<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
+
+<div id="footer">
+
+<p>
+Please send FSF & GNU inquiries to
+<a href="mailto:address@hidden";><address@hidden></a>.
+There are also <a href="/contact/">other ways to contact</a>
+the FSF.
+<br />
+Please send broken links and other corrections or suggestions to
+<a href="mailto:address@hidden";><address@hidden></a>.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Please see the
+<a href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
+README</a> for information on coordinating and submitting
+translations of this article.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Copyright © 1994, 2009 Richard Stallman
+<br />
+This page is licensed under a <a rel="license"
+href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/us/";>Creative
+Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 United States License</a>.
+</p>
+
+<p>Updated:
+<!-- timestamp start -->
+$Date: 2012/01/07 01:27:12 $
+<!-- timestamp end -->
+</p>
+</div>
+
+<!-- <div id="translations"> -->
+<!-- <h4>Translations of this page</h4> -->
+<!-- -->
+<!-- Please keep this list alphabetical by language code. -->
+<!-- Comment what the language is for each type, i.e. de is German. -->
+<!-- Write the language name in its own language (Deutsch) in the text.
-->
+<!-- If you add a new language here, please -->
+<!-- advise address@hidden and add it to -->
+<!-- - /home/www/html/server/standards/README.translations.html -->
+<!-- - one of the lists under the section "Translations Underway" -->
+<!-- - if there is a translation team, you also have to add an alias -->
+<!-- to mail.gnu.org:/com/mailer/aliases -->
+<!-- Please also check you have the language code right; see: -->
+<!-- http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/php/code_list.php -->
+<!-- If the 2-letter ISO 639-1 code is not available, -->
+<!-- use the 3-letter ISO 639-2. -->
+<!-- Please use W3C normative character entities. -->
+<!-- -->
+<!-- See also '(web-trans)Capitalization': -->
+<!--
http://gnu.org/software/trans-coord/manual/web-trans/html_node/Capitalization.html
-->
+<!-- -->
+<!-- -->
+<!-- <ul class="translations-list"> -->
+<!-- Arabic -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/why-free.ar.html">العربية</a> [ar]</li>
-->
+<!-- Bulgarian -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/why-free.bg.html">български</a> [bg]</li>
-->
+<!-- Catalan -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/why-free.ca.html">català</a> [ca]</li> -->
+<!-- Czech -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/why-free.cs.html">Česky</a> [cs]</li> -->
+<!-- Danish -->
+<!-- <li><a href="/philosophy/why-free.da.html">dansk</a> [da]</li> -->
+<!-- German -->
+<!-- <li><a href="/philosophy/why-free.de.html">Deutsch</a> [de]</li> -->
+<!-- Greek -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/why-free.el.html">ελληνικά</a> [el]</li>
-->
+<!-- English -->
+<!-- <li><a href="/philosophy/why-free.html">English</a> [en]</li> -->
+<!-- Spanish -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/why-free.es.html">español</a> [es]</li> -->
+<!-- Persian/Farsi -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/why-free.fa.html">فارسی</a> [fa]</li>
-->
+<!-- French -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/why-free.fr.html">français</a> [fr]</li> -->
+<!-- Croatian -->
+<!-- <li><a href="/philosophy/why-free.hr.html">hrvatski</a> [hr]</li> -->
+<!-- Hungarian -->
+<!-- <li><a href="/philosophy/why-free.hu.html">magyar</a> [hu]</li> -->
+<!-- Indonesian -->
+<!-- <li><a href="/philosophy/why-free.id.html">Bahasa
Indonesia</a> [id]</li> -->
+<!-- Italian -->
+<!-- <li><a href="/philosophy/why-free.it.html">italiano</a> [it]</li> -->
+<!-- Japanese -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/why-free.ja.html">日本語</a> [ja]</li>
-->
+<!-- Korean -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/why-free.ko.html">한국어</a> [ko]</li>
-->
+<!-- Malayalam -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/why-free.ml.html">മലയാളം</a> [ml]</li>
-->
+<!-- Dutch -->
+<!-- <li><a href="/philosophy/why-free.nl.html">Nederlands</a> [nl]</li>
-->
+<!-- Polish -->
+<!-- <li><a href="/philosophy/why-free.pl.html">polski</a> [pl]</li> -->
+<!-- Brazilian Portuguese -->
+<!-- <li><a href="/philosophy/why-free.pt-br.html">português do
Brasil</a> [pt-br]</li> -->
+<!-- Romanian -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/why-free.ro.html">română</a> [ro]</li> -->
+<!-- Russian -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/why-free.ru.html">русский</a> [ru]</li>
-->
+<!-- Tamil -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/why-free.ta.html">தமிழ்</a> [ta]</li>
-->
+<!-- Turkish -->
+<!-- <li><a
href="/philosophy/why-free.tr.html">Türkçe</a> [tr]</li> -->
+<!-- </ul> -->
+<!-- </div> -->
+
+</div>
+</body>
+</html>
| [Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread] |
- www licenses/licenses.es.html licenses/licenses...,
Yavor Doganov <=