www/philosophy why-free.html

[Yavor Doganov]

CVSROOT:        /web/www
Module name:    www
Changes by:     Yavor Doganov <yavor>   07/03/24 07:23:18

Modified files:
        philosophy     : why-free.html 

Log message:
        ldquo/rdquo

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

Patches:
Index: why-free.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/why-free.html,v
retrieving revision 1.30
retrieving revision 1.31
diff -u -b -r1.30 -r1.31
--- why-free.html       23 Mar 2007 10:24:40 -0000      1.30
+++ why-free.html       24 Mar 2007 07:23:13 -0000      1.31
@@ -17,9 +17,10 @@
 
 <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>
+software programs &ldquo;owners&rdquo;, 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
@@ -47,10 +48,11 @@
        <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 MIT'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.</li>
+       <li>Prosecution (by the US government, at the SPA's request)
+of people such as <abbr title="Massachusetts Institute of
+Technology">MIT</abbr>'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.</li>
 
 </ul>
 
@@ -58,11 +60,12 @@
 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>
+from hand to hand as &ldquo;samizdat&rdquo;.  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
@@ -73,10 +76,11 @@
 <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>
+Owners use smear words such as &ldquo;piracy&rdquo; and
+&ldquo;theft&rdquo;, as well as expert terminology such as
+&ldquo;intellectual property&rdquo; and &ldquo;damage&rdquo;, 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
@@ -87,15 +91,17 @@
 <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>
+Owners say that they suffer &ldquo;harm&rdquo; or &ldquo;economic
+loss&rdquo; 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>
+copies.  Yet the owners compute their &ldquo;losses&rdquo; 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.
 
@@ -184,8 +190,8 @@
 <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 ``production of software'' is what we want, whether the
-software has owners or not.</p>
+It assumes that &ldquo;production of software&rdquo; is what we want,
+whether the software has owners or not.</p>
 
 <p>
 People readily accept this assumption because it accords with our
@@ -225,8 +231,8 @@
 <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>
+helping our neighbors in a natural way is &ldquo;piracy&rdquo;, they
+pollute our society's civic spirit.</p>
 
 <p>
 This is why we say that
@@ -291,12 +297,12 @@
 
 <p>
 As a computer user today, you may find yourself using a
-<a href="/philosophy/categories.html#ProprietarySoftware">proprietary
-(18k characters)</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>
+<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 &ldquo;No&rdquo; to proprietary software.</p>
 
 <p>
 You deserve to be able to cooperate openly and freely with other
@@ -337,7 +343,7 @@
 
 <p>
 Please see the 
-<a href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
+<a href="/server/standards/README.translations">Translations
 README</a> for information on coordinating and submitting
 translations of this article.
 </p>
@@ -353,7 +359,7 @@
 <p>
 Updated:
 <!-- timestamp start -->
-$Date: 2007/03/23 10:24:40 $
+$Date: 2007/03/24 07:23:13 $
 <!-- timestamp end -->
 </p>
 </div>
@@ -393,6 +399,8 @@
 <li><a href="/philosophy/why-free.fr.html">Fran&#x00e7;ais</a>&nbsp;[fr]</li>
 <!-- Croatian -->
 <li><a href="/philosophy/why-free.hr.html">Hrvatski</a>&nbsp;[hr]</li>
+<!-- Hungarian -->
+<li><a href="/philosophy/why-free.hu.html">Magyar</a>&nbsp;[hu]</li>
 <!-- Indonesian -->
 <li><a href="/philosophy/why-free.id.html">Bahasa Indonesia</a>&nbsp;[id]</li>
 <!-- Italian -->
@@ -401,8 +409,6 @@
 <li><a 
href="/philosophy/why-free.ja.html">&#x65e5;&#x672c;&#x8a9e;</a>&nbsp;[ja]</li>
 <!-- Korean -->
 <li><a 
href="/philosophy/why-free.ko.html">&#xd55c;&#xad6d;&#xc5b4;</a>&nbsp;[ko]</li>
-<!-- Hungarian -->
-<li><a href="/philosophy/why-free.hu.html">Magyar</a>&nbsp;[hu]</li>
 <!-- Dutch -->
 <li><a href="/philosophy/why-free.nl.html">Nederlands</a>&nbsp;[nl]</li>
 <!-- Polish -->