[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

www/philosophy essays-and-articles.html latest-...

From: Robert Musial
Subject: www/philosophy essays-and-articles.html latest-...
Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2013 02:17:55 +0000

CVSROOT:        /web/www
Module name:    www
Changes by:     Robert Musial <musial>  13/09/25 02:17:55

Modified files:
        philosophy     : essays-and-articles.html latest-articles.html 
Added files:
        philosophy     : why-call-it-the-swindle.html 

Log message:
        added /philosophy/why-call-it-the-swindle.html per RT #858724, and 
updated /philosophy/essays-and-articles.html and 
/philosophy/latest-articles.html with the links to the new article


Index: essays-and-articles.html
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/essays-and-articles.html,v
retrieving revision 1.51
retrieving revision 1.52
diff -u -b -r1.51 -r1.52
--- essays-and-articles.html    11 Sep 2013 12:52:33 -0000      1.51
+++ essays-and-articles.html    25 Sep 2013 02:17:53 -0000      1.52
@@ -434,6 +434,9 @@
        Non-Free Software</a></li>
   <li><a href="/philosophy/fs-translations.html">Translations of the
   term &ldquo;free software&rdquo;</a> into various languages</li>
+  <li><a href="/philosophy/why-call-it-the-swindle.html">Why call it the
+       Swindle</a></li>
 <h3 id="upholding">Upholding Software Freedom</h3>
@@ -500,7 +503,7 @@
 <!-- timestamp start -->
-$Date: 2013/09/11 12:52:33 $
+$Date: 2013/09/25 02:17:53 $
 <!-- timestamp end -->

Index: latest-articles.html
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/latest-articles.html,v
retrieving revision 1.26
retrieving revision 1.27
diff -u -b -r1.26 -r1.27
--- latest-articles.html        1 Sep 2013 05:49:23 -0000       1.26
+++ latest-articles.html        25 Sep 2013 02:17:53 -0000      1.27
@@ -16,6 +16,7 @@
 <p>Hot off the presses, here are the latest published articles on free
 software and the GNU project.</p>
+<li><a href="/philosophy/why-call-it-the-swindle.html">Why call it the 
 <li><a href="/philosophy/proprietary.html">Proprietary Software</a></li>
 <li><a href="/philosophy/is-ever-good-use-nonfree-program.html">Is It Ever a 
Good Thing to Use a Nonfree Program?</a></li>
 <li><a href="/philosophy/funding-art-vs-funding-software.html">Funding Art vs 
Funding Software</a></li>
@@ -116,7 +117,7 @@
 <!-- timestamp start -->
-$Date: 2013/09/01 05:49:23 $
+$Date: 2013/09/25 02:17:53 $
 <!-- timestamp end -->

Index: why-call-it-the-swindle.html
RCS file: why-call-it-the-swindle.html
diff -N why-call-it-the-swindle.html
--- /dev/null   1 Jan 1970 00:00:00 -0000
+++ why-call-it-the-swindle.html        25 Sep 2013 02:17:53 -0000      1.1
@@ -0,0 +1,110 @@
+<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" -->
+<!-- Parent-Version: 1.75 -->
+<title>Why call it the Swindle  
+- GNU Project - Free Software Foundation</title>
+<!-- begin /server/initial-translations-list.html -->
+<!-- end /server/initial-translations-list.html -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" -->
+<h2>Why call it the Swindle</h2>
+<p>by <a href="http://www.stallman.org/";><strong>Richard
+<p>I go out of my way to call nasty things by names that criticize them. I 
call Apple's user-subjugating computers the "iThings," and Amazon's abusive 
e-reader the "Swindle." Sometimes I refer to Microsoft's operating system as 
"Losedows"; I referred to Microsoft's first operating system as 
"MS-Dog."<sup>1</sup> Of course, I do this to vent my feelings and have fun. 
But this fun is more than personal; it serves an important purpose. Mocking our 
enemies recruits the power of humor into our cause.</p>
+<p>Twisting a name is disrespectful. If we respected the makers of these 
products, we would use the names that they chose … and that's exactly the 
point. These noxious products deserve our contempt, not our respect. Every 
proprietary program subjects its users to some entity's power, but nowadays 
most of them go beyond that to spy on users, restrict them and even push them 
around: the trend is for products to get nastier. These products deserve to be 
wiped out. Those with DRM ought to be illegal.</p>
+<p>When we mention them, we should show that we condemn them, and what easier 
way than by twisting their names? If we don't do that, it is all too easy to 
mention them and fail to present the condemnation. When the product comes up in 
the middle of some other topic, for instance, explaining at greater length that 
the product is bad might seem like a long digression.</p>
+<p>To mention these products by name and fail to condemn them has the effect 
of legitimizing them, which is the opposite of what they call for.</p>
+<p>Companies choose names for products as part of a marketing plan. They 
choose names they think people will be likely to repeat, then invest millions 
of dollars in marketing campaigns to make people repeat and think about those 
names -- usually these marketing campaigns are intended to convince people to 
admire the products based on their superficial attractions and overlook the 
harm they do.</p>
+<p>Every time we call these products by the names the companies use, we 
contribute to their marketing campaigns. Repeating those names is active 
support for the products; twisting them denies the products our support.</p>
+<p>Other terminology besides product names can raise a similar issue. For 
instance, DRM refers to building technology products to restrict their users 
for the benefit of someone else. This inexcusable practice deserves our burning 
hatred until we wipe it out. Naturally, those responsible gave it a name that 
frames the issue from their point of view: "Digital Rights Management." This 
name is the basis of a public relations campaign that aims to win support from 
entities ranging from governments to the W3C.<sup>2</sup></p>
+<p>To use their term is to take their side. If that's not the side you're on, 
why give it your implicit support?</p>
+<p>We take the users' side, and from the users' point of view, what these 
malfeatures manage are not rights but restrictions. So we call them "Digital 
Restrictions Management."</p>
+<p>Neither of those terms is neutral: choose a term, and you choose a side. 
Please choose the users' side and please let it show.</p>
+<p>Once, a man in the audience at my speech claimed that the name "Digital 
Rights Management" was the official name of "DRM," the only possible correct 
name, because it was the first name. He argued that as a consequence it was 
wrong for us to say "Digital Restrictions Management."</p>
+<p>Those who make a product or carry out a business practice typically choose 
a name for it before we even know it exists. If their temporal precedence 
obligated us to use their name, they would have an additional automatic 
advantage, on top of their money, their media influence and their technological 
position. We would have to fight them with our mouths tied behind our backs.</p>
+<p>Some people feel a distaste for twisting names and say it sounds "juvenile" 
or "unprofessional." What they mean is, it doesn't sound humorless and stodgy 
-- and that's a good thing, because we would not have laughter on our side if 
we tried to sound "professional." Fighting oppression is far more serious than 
professional work, so we've got to add comic relief. It calls for real 
maturity, which includes some childishness, not "acting like an adult."</p>
+<p>If you don't like our choice of name parodies, you can invent your own. The 
more, the merrier. Of course, there are other ways to express condemnation. If 
you want to sound "professional," you can show it in other ways. They can get 
the point across, but they require more time and effort, especially if you 
don't make use of mockery. Take care this does not this lead you to skimp; 
don't let the pressure against such "digression" push you into insufficiently 
criticizing the nasty things you mention, because that would have the effect of 
legitimizing them.</p>
+<sup>1</sup> Take action against these products:
+<a href="u.fsf.org/ithings">u.fsf.org/ithings</a>, <a 
+<a href="u.fsf.org/ebookslist">u.fsf.org/ebookslist</a><br>
+<a href="upgradefromwindows.org">upgradefromwindows.org</a><br>
+<sup>2</sup> <a href="u.fsf.org/drm">u.fsf.org/drm</a>
+</div><!-- for id="content", starts in the include above -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
+<div id="footer">
+<p>Please send general FSF &amp; GNU inquiries to
+<a href="mailto:address@hidden";>&lt;address@hidden&gt;</a>.
+There are also <a href="/contact/">other ways to contact</a>
+the FSF.  Broken links and other corrections or suggestions can be sent
+to <a href="mailto:address@hidden";>&lt;address@hidden&gt;</a>.</p>
+<p><!-- TRANSLATORS: Ignore the original text in this paragraph,
+        replace it with the translation of these two:
+        We work hard and do our best to provide accurate, good quality
+        translations.  However, we are not exempt from imperfection.
+        Please send your comments and general suggestions in this regard
+        to <a href="mailto:address@hidden";>
+        &lt;address@hidden&gt;</a>.</p>
+        <p>For information on coordinating and submitting translations of
+        our web pages, see <a
+        href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
+        README</a>. -->
+Please see the <a
+README</a> for information on coordinating and submitting translations
+of this article.</p>
+<!-- Regarding copyright, in general, standalone pages (as opposed to
+     files generated as part of manuals) 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.  For web pages, it is ok to list just the latest year the
+     document was modified, or published.
+     If you wish to list earlier years, that is ok too.
+     Either "2001, 2002, 2003" or "2001-2003" are ok for specifying
+     years, as long as each year in the range is in fact a copyrightable
+     year, i.e., a year in which the document was published (including
+     being publicly visible on the web or in a revision control system).
+     There is more detail about copyright years in the GNU Maintainers
+     Information document, www.gnu.org/prep/maintain. -->
+<p>Copyright &copy; 2013 Richard Stallman</p>
+<p>This page is licensed under a <a rel="license"
+Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 United States License</a>.</p>
+<!--#include virtual="/server/bottom-notes.html" -->
+<!-- timestamp start -->
+$Date: 2013/09/25 02:17:53 $
+<!-- timestamp end -->

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]