[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
www/philosophy ipjustice.nl.html netscape-npl.n...
|
From: |
GNUN |
|
Subject: |
www/philosophy ipjustice.nl.html netscape-npl.n... |
|
Date: |
Fri, 13 Dec 2013 05:31:30 +0000 |
CVSROOT: /web/www
Module name: www
Changes by: GNUN <gnun> 13/12/13 05:31:30
Modified files:
philosophy : ipjustice.nl.html netscape-npl.nl.html
no-word-attachments.nl.html
pirate-party.cs.html pragmatic.hr.html
pragmatic.ko.html pragmatic.nl.html
social-inertia.hr.html
the-danger-of-ebooks.hr.html
the-danger-of-ebooks.ml.html
the-danger-of-ebooks.pl.html
why-copyleft.hr.html why-copyleft.ko.html
why-copyleft.nl.html why-free.ar.html
why-free.hr.html why-free.ko.html
why-free.nl.html why-free.pt-br.html
why-free.zh-tw.html x.ko.html x.nl.html
Added files:
philosophy/po : ipjustice.nl-diff.html
netscape-npl.nl-diff.html
no-word-attachments.nl-diff.html
pirate-party.cs-diff.html
pragmatic.hr-diff.html pragmatic.ko-diff.html
pragmatic.nl-diff.html
social-inertia.hr-diff.html
the-danger-of-ebooks.hr-diff.html
the-danger-of-ebooks.ml-diff.html
the-danger-of-ebooks.pl-diff.html
why-copyleft.hr-diff.html
why-copyleft.ko-diff.html
why-copyleft.nl-diff.html why-free.ar-diff.html
why-free.hr-diff.html why-free.ko-diff.html
why-free.nl-diff.html why-free.pt-br-diff.html
why-free.zh-tw-diff.html x.ko-diff.html
x.nl-diff.html
Log message:
Automatic update by GNUnited Nations.
CVSWeb URLs:
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/ipjustice.nl.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.11&r2=1.12
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/netscape-npl.nl.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.11&r2=1.12
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/no-word-attachments.nl.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.15&r2=1.16
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/pirate-party.cs.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.22&r2=1.23
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/pragmatic.hr.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.5&r2=1.6
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/pragmatic.ko.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.25&r2=1.26
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/pragmatic.nl.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.15&r2=1.16
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/social-inertia.hr.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.1&r2=1.2
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/the-danger-of-ebooks.hr.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.4&r2=1.5
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/the-danger-of-ebooks.ml.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.1&r2=1.2
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/the-danger-of-ebooks.pl.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.23&r2=1.24
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/why-copyleft.hr.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.4&r2=1.5
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/why-copyleft.ko.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.24&r2=1.25
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/why-copyleft.nl.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.11&r2=1.12
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/why-free.ar.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.24&r2=1.25
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/why-free.hr.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.11&r2=1.12
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/why-free.ko.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.31&r2=1.32
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/why-free.nl.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.16&r2=1.17
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/why-free.pt-br.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.20&r2=1.21
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/why-free.zh-tw.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.12&r2=1.13
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/x.ko.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.23&r2=1.24
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/x.nl.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.11&r2=1.12
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/po/ipjustice.nl-diff.html?cvsroot=www&rev=1.1
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/po/netscape-npl.nl-diff.html?cvsroot=www&rev=1.1
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/po/no-word-attachments.nl-diff.html?cvsroot=www&rev=1.1
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/po/pirate-party.cs-diff.html?cvsroot=www&rev=1.1
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/po/pragmatic.hr-diff.html?cvsroot=www&rev=1.1
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/po/pragmatic.ko-diff.html?cvsroot=www&rev=1.1
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/po/pragmatic.nl-diff.html?cvsroot=www&rev=1.1
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/po/social-inertia.hr-diff.html?cvsroot=www&rev=1.1
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/po/the-danger-of-ebooks.hr-diff.html?cvsroot=www&rev=1.1
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/po/the-danger-of-ebooks.ml-diff.html?cvsroot=www&rev=1.1
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/po/the-danger-of-ebooks.pl-diff.html?cvsroot=www&rev=1.1
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/po/why-copyleft.hr-diff.html?cvsroot=www&rev=1.1
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/po/why-copyleft.ko-diff.html?cvsroot=www&rev=1.1
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/po/why-copyleft.nl-diff.html?cvsroot=www&rev=1.1
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/po/why-free.ar-diff.html?cvsroot=www&rev=1.1
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/po/why-free.hr-diff.html?cvsroot=www&rev=1.1
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/po/why-free.ko-diff.html?cvsroot=www&rev=1.1
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/po/why-free.nl-diff.html?cvsroot=www&rev=1.1
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/po/why-free.pt-br-diff.html?cvsroot=www&rev=1.1
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/po/why-free.zh-tw-diff.html?cvsroot=www&rev=1.1
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/po/x.ko-diff.html?cvsroot=www&rev=1.1
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/po/x.nl-diff.html?cvsroot=www&rev=1.1
Patches:
Index: ipjustice.nl.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/ipjustice.nl.html,v
retrieving revision 1.11
retrieving revision 1.12
diff -u -b -r1.11 -r1.12
--- ipjustice.nl.html 31 Aug 2013 20:12:09 -0000 1.11
+++ ipjustice.nl.html 13 Dec 2013 05:31:20 -0000 1.12
@@ -10,6 +10,13 @@
<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/ipjustice.translist" -->
<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.nl.html" -->
+<!--#set var="PO_FILE"
+ value='<a href="http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/po/ipjustice.nl.po";>
+ http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/po/ipjustice.nl.po</a>' -->
+ <!--#set var="ORIGINAL_FILE" value="/philosophy/ipjustice.html" -->
+ <!--#set var="DIFF_FILE" value="/philosophy/po/ipjustice.nl-diff.html" -->
+ <!--#set var="OUTDATED_SINCE" value="2013-10-14" -->
+ <!--#include virtual="/server/outdated.nl.html" -->
<h2>Wijs het voorstel voor strengere handhaving van intellectueel eigendom
af</h2>
<p>
@@ -82,7 +89,7 @@
<p><!-- timestamp start -->
Bijgewerkt:
-$Date: 2013/08/31 20:12:09 $
+$Date: 2013/12/13 05:31:20 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
Index: netscape-npl.nl.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/netscape-npl.nl.html,v
retrieving revision 1.11
retrieving revision 1.12
diff -u -b -r1.11 -r1.12
--- netscape-npl.nl.html 31 Aug 2013 20:12:23 -0000 1.11
+++ netscape-npl.nl.html 13 Dec 2013 05:31:20 -0000 1.12
@@ -9,6 +9,13 @@
<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/netscape-npl.translist" -->
<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.nl.html" -->
+<!--#set var="PO_FILE"
+ value='<a href="http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/po/netscape-npl.nl.po";>
+ http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/po/netscape-npl.nl.po</a>' -->
+ <!--#set var="ORIGINAL_FILE" value="/philosophy/netscape-npl.html" -->
+ <!--#set var="DIFF_FILE" value="/philosophy/po/netscape-npl.nl-diff.html" -->
+ <!--#set var="OUTDATED_SINCE" value="2013-10-14" -->
+ <!--#include virtual="/server/outdated.nl.html" -->
<h2>Over de Netscape Public License</h2>
<p>
@@ -255,7 +262,7 @@
<p><!-- timestamp start -->
Bijgewerkt:
-$Date: 2013/08/31 20:12:23 $
+$Date: 2013/12/13 05:31:20 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
Index: no-word-attachments.nl.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/no-word-attachments.nl.html,v
retrieving revision 1.15
retrieving revision 1.16
diff -u -b -r1.15 -r1.16
--- no-word-attachments.nl.html 31 Aug 2013 20:12:25 -0000 1.15
+++ no-word-attachments.nl.html 13 Dec 2013 05:31:20 -0000 1.16
@@ -15,6 +15,13 @@
<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/no-word-attachments.translist" -->
<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.nl.html" -->
+<!--#set var="PO_FILE"
+ value='<a href="http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/po/no-word-attachments.nl.po";>
+ http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/po/no-word-attachments.nl.po</a>' -->
+ <!--#set var="ORIGINAL_FILE" value="/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html" -->
+ <!--#set var="DIFF_FILE"
value="/philosophy/po/no-word-attachments.nl-diff.html" -->
+ <!--#set var="OUTDATED_SINCE" value="2013-10-14" -->
+ <!--#include virtual="/server/outdated.nl.html" -->
<h2>We kunnen een einde maken aan Word bijlagen</h2>
<p>door <strong>Richard M. Stallman</strong>
@@ -336,7 +343,7 @@
<p><!-- timestamp start -->
Bijgewerkt:
-$Date: 2013/08/31 20:12:25 $
+$Date: 2013/12/13 05:31:20 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
Index: pirate-party.cs.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/pirate-party.cs.html,v
retrieving revision 1.22
retrieving revision 1.23
diff -u -b -r1.22 -r1.23
--- pirate-party.cs.html 31 Aug 2013 20:12:29 -0000 1.22
+++ pirate-party.cs.html 13 Dec 2013 05:31:21 -0000 1.23
@@ -8,6 +8,13 @@
<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/pirate-party.translist" -->
<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.cs.html" -->
+<!--#set var="PO_FILE"
+ value='<a href="http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/po/pirate-party.cs.po";>
+ http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/po/pirate-party.cs.po</a>' -->
+ <!--#set var="ORIGINAL_FILE" value="/philosophy/pirate-party.html" -->
+ <!--#set var="DIFF_FILE" value="/philosophy/po/pirate-party.cs-diff.html" -->
+ <!--#set var="OUTDATED_SINCE" value="2013-10-14" -->
+ <!--#include virtual="/server/outdated.cs.html" -->
<h2>Jak švédská Pirátská strana podkopává svobodný software</h2>
<p>od <a href="http://www.stallman.org/";>Richarda Stallmana</a></p>
@@ -155,7 +162,7 @@
<p><!-- timestamp start -->
Aktualizováno:
-$Date: 2013/08/31 20:12:29 $
+$Date: 2013/12/13 05:31:21 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
Index: pragmatic.hr.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/pragmatic.hr.html,v
retrieving revision 1.5
retrieving revision 1.6
diff -u -b -r1.5 -r1.6
--- pragmatic.hr.html 31 Aug 2013 20:12:31 -0000 1.5
+++ pragmatic.hr.html 13 Dec 2013 05:31:21 -0000 1.6
@@ -10,6 +10,13 @@
<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/pragmatic.translist" -->
<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.hr.html" -->
+<!--#set var="PO_FILE"
+ value='<a href="http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/po/pragmatic.hr.po";>
+ http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/po/pragmatic.hr.po</a>' -->
+ <!--#set var="ORIGINAL_FILE" value="/philosophy/pragmatic.html" -->
+ <!--#set var="DIFF_FILE" value="/philosophy/po/pragmatic.hr-diff.html" -->
+ <!--#set var="OUTDATED_SINCE" value="2013-10-14" -->
+ <!--#include virtual="/server/outdated.hr.html" -->
<h2>Copyleft: pragmatiÄni idealizam</h2>
<p>
@@ -202,7 +209,7 @@
<p><!-- timestamp start -->
Zadnji put promijenjeno:
-$Date: 2013/08/31 20:12:31 $
+$Date: 2013/12/13 05:31:21 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
Index: pragmatic.ko.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/pragmatic.ko.html,v
retrieving revision 1.25
retrieving revision 1.26
diff -u -b -r1.25 -r1.26
--- pragmatic.ko.html 31 Aug 2013 20:12:31 -0000 1.25
+++ pragmatic.ko.html 13 Dec 2013 05:31:21 -0000 1.26
@@ -9,6 +9,13 @@
<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/pragmatic.translist" -->
<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.ko.html" -->
+<!--#set var="PO_FILE"
+ value='<a href="http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/po/pragmatic.ko.po";>
+ http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/po/pragmatic.ko.po</a>' -->
+ <!--#set var="ORIGINAL_FILE" value="/philosophy/pragmatic.html" -->
+ <!--#set var="DIFF_FILE" value="/philosophy/po/pragmatic.ko-diff.html" -->
+ <!--#set var="OUTDATED_SINCE" value="2013-10-14" -->
+ <!--#include virtual="/server/outdated.ko.html" -->
<h2>ì¹´í¼ë íí¸: ì¤ì©ì ì¸ ì´ì주ì</h2>
<p>
@@ -155,7 +162,7 @@
<p><!-- timestamp start -->
ìµì¢
ìì ì¼:
-$Date: 2013/08/31 20:12:31 $
+$Date: 2013/12/13 05:31:21 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
Index: pragmatic.nl.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/pragmatic.nl.html,v
retrieving revision 1.15
retrieving revision 1.16
diff -u -b -r1.15 -r1.16
--- pragmatic.nl.html 31 Aug 2013 20:12:31 -0000 1.15
+++ pragmatic.nl.html 13 Dec 2013 05:31:21 -0000 1.16
@@ -10,6 +10,13 @@
<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/pragmatic.translist" -->
<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.nl.html" -->
+<!--#set var="PO_FILE"
+ value='<a href="http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/po/pragmatic.nl.po";>
+ http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/po/pragmatic.nl.po</a>' -->
+ <!--#set var="ORIGINAL_FILE" value="/philosophy/pragmatic.html" -->
+ <!--#set var="DIFF_FILE" value="/philosophy/po/pragmatic.nl-diff.html" -->
+ <!--#set var="OUTDATED_SINCE" value="2013-10-14" -->
+ <!--#include virtual="/server/outdated.nl.html" -->
<h2>Auteursplicht: Pragmatisch Idealisme</h2>
<p>
@@ -208,7 +215,7 @@
<p><!-- timestamp start -->
Bijgewerkt:
-$Date: 2013/08/31 20:12:31 $
+$Date: 2013/12/13 05:31:21 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
Index: social-inertia.hr.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/social-inertia.hr.html,v
retrieving revision 1.1
retrieving revision 1.2
diff -u -b -r1.1 -r1.2
--- social-inertia.hr.html 8 Sep 2013 16:34:30 -0000 1.1
+++ social-inertia.hr.html 13 Dec 2013 05:31:21 -0000 1.2
@@ -9,6 +9,13 @@
<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/social-inertia.translist" -->
<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.hr.html" -->
+<!--#set var="PO_FILE"
+ value='<a href="http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/po/social-inertia.hr.po";>
+ http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/po/social-inertia.hr.po</a>' -->
+ <!--#set var="ORIGINAL_FILE" value="/philosophy/social-inertia.html" -->
+ <!--#set var="DIFF_FILE" value="/philosophy/po/social-inertia.hr-diff.html"
-->
+ <!--#set var="OUTDATED_SINCE" value="2013-10-14" -->
+ <!--#include virtual="/server/outdated.hr.html" -->
<h2>Inertnost društva i kako je pobijediti</h2>
<p>napisao <a href="http://www.stallman.org/";><strong>Richard
@@ -116,7 +123,7 @@
<p><!-- timestamp start -->
Vrijeme zadnje izmjene:
-$Date: 2013/09/08 16:34:30 $
+$Date: 2013/12/13 05:31:21 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
Index: the-danger-of-ebooks.hr.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/the-danger-of-ebooks.hr.html,v
retrieving revision 1.4
retrieving revision 1.5
diff -u -b -r1.4 -r1.5
--- the-danger-of-ebooks.hr.html 31 Aug 2013 20:12:41 -0000 1.4
+++ the-danger-of-ebooks.hr.html 13 Dec 2013 05:31:21 -0000 1.5
@@ -10,6 +10,13 @@
<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/the-danger-of-ebooks.translist" -->
<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.hr.html" -->
+<!--#set var="PO_FILE"
+ value='<a href="http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/po/the-danger-of-ebooks.hr.po";>
+ http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/po/the-danger-of-ebooks.hr.po</a>' -->
+ <!--#set var="ORIGINAL_FILE" value="/philosophy/the-danger-of-ebooks.html" -->
+ <!--#set var="DIFF_FILE"
value="/philosophy/po/the-danger-of-ebooks.hr-diff.html" -->
+ <!--#set var="OUTDATED_SINCE" value="2013-10-14" -->
+ <!--#include virtual="/server/outdated.hr.html" -->
<h2>Opasnosti e-knjiga</h2>
<div style="text-align: center; font-size: 110%;text-shadow: 0 0 0.2em #fff;
width: 300px; float: right; margin: 12px; background-color: #a0f112; color:
#353831; padding: 1em;"><a
href="http://defectivebydesign.org/ebooks.html";>Pridružite se našoj listi
@@ -128,7 +135,7 @@
<p><!-- timestamp start -->
Vrijeme zadnje izmjene:
-$Date: 2013/08/31 20:12:41 $
+$Date: 2013/12/13 05:31:21 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
Index: the-danger-of-ebooks.ml.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/the-danger-of-ebooks.ml.html,v
retrieving revision 1.1
retrieving revision 1.2
diff -u -b -r1.1 -r1.2
--- the-danger-of-ebooks.ml.html 22 Sep 2013 04:29:17 -0000 1.1
+++ the-danger-of-ebooks.ml.html 13 Dec 2013 05:31:22 -0000 1.2
@@ -10,6 +10,13 @@
<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/the-danger-of-ebooks.translist" -->
<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.ml.html" -->
+<!--#set var="PO_FILE"
+ value='<a href="http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/po/the-danger-of-ebooks.ml.po";>
+ http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/po/the-danger-of-ebooks.ml.po</a>' -->
+ <!--#set var="ORIGINAL_FILE" value="/philosophy/the-danger-of-ebooks.html" -->
+ <!--#set var="DIFF_FILE"
value="/philosophy/po/the-danger-of-ebooks.ml-diff.html" -->
+ <!--#set var="OUTDATED_SINCE" value="2013-10-14" -->
+ <!--#include virtual="/server/outdated.ml.html" -->
<h2>à´-à´¬àµà´àµà´àµà´à´³à´¿à´²àµ à´
à´ªà´à´à´</h2>
<div style="text-align: center; font-size: 110%;text-shadow: 0 0 0.2em #fff;
width: 300px; float: right; margin: 12px; background-color: #a0f112; color:
#353831; padding: 1em;"><a
href="http://defectivebydesign.org/ebooks.html";>à´-à´¬àµà´àµà´àµà´à´³à´¿à´²àµ
à´
à´ªà´à´à´µàµà´®à´¾à´¯à´¿
@@ -131,7 +138,7 @@
<p><!-- timestamp start -->
à´ªàµà´¤àµà´àµà´à´¿à´¯à´¤àµ:
-$Date: 2013/09/22 04:29:17 $
+$Date: 2013/12/13 05:31:22 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
Index: the-danger-of-ebooks.pl.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/the-danger-of-ebooks.pl.html,v
retrieving revision 1.23
retrieving revision 1.24
diff -u -b -r1.23 -r1.24
--- the-danger-of-ebooks.pl.html 31 Aug 2013 20:12:41 -0000 1.23
+++ the-danger-of-ebooks.pl.html 13 Dec 2013 05:31:23 -0000 1.24
@@ -10,6 +10,13 @@
<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/the-danger-of-ebooks.translist" -->
<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.pl.html" -->
+<!--#set var="PO_FILE"
+ value='<a href="http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/po/the-danger-of-ebooks.pl.po";>
+ http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/po/the-danger-of-ebooks.pl.po</a>' -->
+ <!--#set var="ORIGINAL_FILE" value="/philosophy/the-danger-of-ebooks.html" -->
+ <!--#set var="DIFF_FILE"
value="/philosophy/po/the-danger-of-ebooks.pl-diff.html" -->
+ <!--#set var="OUTDATED_SINCE" value="2013-10-14" -->
+ <!--#include virtual="/server/outdated.pl.html" -->
<h2>NiebezpieczeÅstwo e-booków</h2>
<div style="text-align: center; font-size: 110%;text-shadow: 0 0 0.2em #fff;
width: 300px; float: right; margin: 12px; background-color: #a0f112; color:
#353831; padding: 1em;"><a
href="http://defectivebydesign.org/ebooks.html";>Zapiszcie siÄ
@@ -136,7 +143,7 @@
<p><!-- timestamp start -->
Aktualizowane:
-$Date: 2013/08/31 20:12:41 $
+$Date: 2013/12/13 05:31:23 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
Index: why-copyleft.hr.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/why-copyleft.hr.html,v
retrieving revision 1.4
retrieving revision 1.5
diff -u -b -r1.4 -r1.5
--- why-copyleft.hr.html 31 Aug 2013 20:12:48 -0000 1.4
+++ why-copyleft.hr.html 13 Dec 2013 05:31:23 -0000 1.5
@@ -8,6 +8,13 @@
<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/why-copyleft.translist" -->
<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.hr.html" -->
+<!--#set var="PO_FILE"
+ value='<a href="http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/po/why-copyleft.hr.po";>
+ http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/po/why-copyleft.hr.po</a>' -->
+ <!--#set var="ORIGINAL_FILE" value="/philosophy/why-copyleft.html" -->
+ <!--#set var="DIFF_FILE" value="/philosophy/po/why-copyleft.hr-diff.html" -->
+ <!--#set var="OUTDATED_SINCE" value="2013-10-14" -->
+ <!--#include virtual="/server/outdated.hr.html" -->
<h2>Zašto Copyleft</h2>
<!-- This document uses XHTML 1.0 Strict, but may be served as -->
@@ -107,7 +114,7 @@
<p><!-- timestamp start -->
Vrijeme zadnje izmjene:
-$Date: 2013/08/31 20:12:48 $
+$Date: 2013/12/13 05:31:23 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
Index: why-copyleft.ko.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/why-copyleft.ko.html,v
retrieving revision 1.24
retrieving revision 1.25
diff -u -b -r1.24 -r1.25
--- why-copyleft.ko.html 31 Aug 2013 20:12:48 -0000 1.24
+++ why-copyleft.ko.html 13 Dec 2013 05:31:23 -0000 1.25
@@ -8,6 +8,13 @@
<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/why-copyleft.translist" -->
<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.ko.html" -->
+<!--#set var="PO_FILE"
+ value='<a href="http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/po/why-copyleft.ko.po";>
+ http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/po/why-copyleft.ko.po</a>' -->
+ <!--#set var="ORIGINAL_FILE" value="/philosophy/why-copyleft.html" -->
+ <!--#set var="DIFF_FILE" value="/philosophy/po/why-copyleft.ko-diff.html" -->
+ <!--#set var="OUTDATED_SINCE" value="2013-10-14" -->
+ <!--#include virtual="/server/outdated.ko.html" -->
<h2>ì ì¹´í¼ë íí¸ì¸ê°?</h2>
<!-- This document uses XHTML 1.0 Strict, but may be served as -->
@@ -98,7 +105,7 @@
<p><!-- timestamp start -->
ìµì¢
ìì ì¼:
-$Date: 2013/08/31 20:12:48 $
+$Date: 2013/12/13 05:31:23 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
Index: why-copyleft.nl.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/why-copyleft.nl.html,v
retrieving revision 1.11
retrieving revision 1.12
diff -u -b -r1.11 -r1.12
--- why-copyleft.nl.html 31 Aug 2013 20:12:48 -0000 1.11
+++ why-copyleft.nl.html 13 Dec 2013 05:31:23 -0000 1.12
@@ -8,6 +8,13 @@
<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/why-copyleft.translist" -->
<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.nl.html" -->
+<!--#set var="PO_FILE"
+ value='<a href="http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/po/why-copyleft.nl.po";>
+ http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/po/why-copyleft.nl.po</a>' -->
+ <!--#set var="ORIGINAL_FILE" value="/philosophy/why-copyleft.html" -->
+ <!--#set var="DIFF_FILE" value="/philosophy/po/why-copyleft.nl-diff.html" -->
+ <!--#set var="OUTDATED_SINCE" value="2013-10-14" -->
+ <!--#include virtual="/server/outdated.nl.html" -->
<h2>Waarom Copyleft?</h2>
<!-- This document uses XHTML 1.0 Strict, but may be served as -->
@@ -109,7 +116,7 @@
<p><!-- timestamp start -->
Bijgewerkt:
-$Date: 2013/08/31 20:12:48 $
+$Date: 2013/12/13 05:31:23 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
Index: why-free.ar.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/why-free.ar.html,v
retrieving revision 1.24
retrieving revision 1.25
diff -u -b -r1.24 -r1.25
--- why-free.ar.html 31 Aug 2013 20:12:49 -0000 1.24
+++ why-free.ar.html 13 Dec 2013 05:31:23 -0000 1.25
@@ -13,6 +13,13 @@
<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/why-free.translist" -->
<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.ar.html" -->
+<!--#set var="PO_FILE"
+ value='<a href="http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/po/why-free.ar.po";>
+ http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/po/why-free.ar.po</a>' -->
+ <!--#set var="ORIGINAL_FILE" value="/philosophy/why-free.html" -->
+ <!--#set var="DIFF_FILE" value="/philosophy/po/why-free.ar-diff.html" -->
+ <!--#set var="OUTDATED_SINCE" value="2013-10-14" -->
+ <!--#include virtual="/server/outdated.ar.html" -->
<h2>ÙÙ
اذا ÙÙس عÙ٠اÙبراÙ
ج Ø£Ù ÙÙÙÙ ÙدÙÙا Ù
اÙÙ</h2>
<p>Ù
Ù Ùب٠<a href="http://www.stallman.org/";><strong> رÙشارد
ستاÙÙ
اÙ
@@ -332,7 +339,7 @@
<p><!-- timestamp start -->
:تØدÙØ«
-$Date: 2013/08/31 20:12:49 $
+$Date: 2013/12/13 05:31:23 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
Index: why-free.hr.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/why-free.hr.html,v
retrieving revision 1.11
retrieving revision 1.12
diff -u -b -r1.11 -r1.12
--- why-free.hr.html 31 Aug 2013 20:12:49 -0000 1.11
+++ why-free.hr.html 13 Dec 2013 05:31:23 -0000 1.12
@@ -13,6 +13,13 @@
<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/why-free.translist" -->
<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.hr.html" -->
+<!--#set var="PO_FILE"
+ value='<a href="http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/po/why-free.hr.po";>
+ http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/po/why-free.hr.po</a>' -->
+ <!--#set var="ORIGINAL_FILE" value="/philosophy/why-free.html" -->
+ <!--#set var="DIFF_FILE" value="/philosophy/po/why-free.hr-diff.html" -->
+ <!--#set var="OUTDATED_SINCE" value="2013-10-14" -->
+ <!--#include virtual="/server/outdated.hr.html" -->
<h2>Zašto softver ne bi trebao imati vlasnike</h2>
<p><a href="http://www.stallman.org/";><strong>Richard Stallman</strong></a></p>
@@ -360,7 +367,7 @@
<p><!-- timestamp start -->
Zadnji put promijenjeno:
-$Date: 2013/08/31 20:12:49 $
+$Date: 2013/12/13 05:31:23 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
Index: why-free.ko.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/why-free.ko.html,v
retrieving revision 1.31
retrieving revision 1.32
diff -u -b -r1.31 -r1.32
--- why-free.ko.html 31 Aug 2013 20:12:49 -0000 1.31
+++ why-free.ko.html 13 Dec 2013 05:31:23 -0000 1.32
@@ -11,6 +11,13 @@
<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/why-free.translist" -->
<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.ko.html" -->
+<!--#set var="PO_FILE"
+ value='<a href="http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/po/why-free.ko.po";>
+ http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/po/why-free.ko.po</a>' -->
+ <!--#set var="ORIGINAL_FILE" value="/philosophy/why-free.html" -->
+ <!--#set var="DIFF_FILE" value="/philosophy/po/why-free.ko-diff.html" -->
+ <!--#set var="OUTDATED_SINCE" value="2013-10-14" -->
+ <!--#include virtual="/server/outdated.ko.html" -->
<h2>ì ìíí¸ì¨ì´ë ìì ìê° ìì¼ë©´ ì ëëê°</h2>
<p>ê¸: <a href="http://www.stallman.org/";><strong>리ì²ë
ì¤í¨ë¨¼</strong></a></p>
@@ -288,7 +295,7 @@
<p><!-- timestamp start -->
ìµì¢
ìì ì¼:
-$Date: 2013/08/31 20:12:49 $
+$Date: 2013/12/13 05:31:23 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
Index: why-free.nl.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/why-free.nl.html,v
retrieving revision 1.16
retrieving revision 1.17
diff -u -b -r1.16 -r1.17
--- why-free.nl.html 31 Aug 2013 20:12:49 -0000 1.16
+++ why-free.nl.html 13 Dec 2013 05:31:24 -0000 1.17
@@ -13,6 +13,13 @@
<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/why-free.translist" -->
<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.nl.html" -->
+<!--#set var="PO_FILE"
+ value='<a href="http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/po/why-free.nl.po";>
+ http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/po/why-free.nl.po</a>' -->
+ <!--#set var="ORIGINAL_FILE" value="/philosophy/why-free.html" -->
+ <!--#set var="DIFF_FILE" value="/philosophy/po/why-free.nl-diff.html" -->
+ <!--#set var="OUTDATED_SINCE" value="2013-10-14" -->
+ <!--#include virtual="/server/outdated.nl.html" -->
<h2>Waarom Software Geen Bezit Mag Zijn</h2>
<p>door <a href="http://www.stallman.org/";><strong>Richard
@@ -366,7 +373,7 @@
<p><!-- timestamp start -->
Bijgewerkt:
-$Date: 2013/08/31 20:12:49 $
+$Date: 2013/12/13 05:31:24 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
Index: why-free.pt-br.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/why-free.pt-br.html,v
retrieving revision 1.20
retrieving revision 1.21
diff -u -b -r1.20 -r1.21
--- why-free.pt-br.html 31 Aug 2013 20:12:50 -0000 1.20
+++ why-free.pt-br.html 13 Dec 2013 05:31:24 -0000 1.21
@@ -13,6 +13,13 @@
<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/why-free.translist" -->
<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.pt-br.html" -->
+<!--#set var="PO_FILE"
+ value='<a href="http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/po/why-free.pt-br.po";>
+ http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/po/why-free.pt-br.po</a>' -->
+ <!--#set var="ORIGINAL_FILE" value="/philosophy/why-free.html" -->
+ <!--#set var="DIFF_FILE" value="/philosophy/po/why-free.pt-br-diff.html" -->
+ <!--#set var="OUTDATED_SINCE" value="2013-10-14" -->
+ <!--#include virtual="/server/outdated.pt-br.html" -->
<h2>Por Que o Software Não Deve Ter Donos</h2>
<p>por <a href="http://www.stallman.org/";><strong>Richard
Stallman</strong></a></p>
@@ -365,7 +372,7 @@
<p><!-- timestamp start -->
Ãltima atualização:
-$Date: 2013/08/31 20:12:50 $
+$Date: 2013/12/13 05:31:24 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
Index: why-free.zh-tw.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/why-free.zh-tw.html,v
retrieving revision 1.12
retrieving revision 1.13
diff -u -b -r1.12 -r1.13
--- why-free.zh-tw.html 31 Aug 2013 20:12:50 -0000 1.12
+++ why-free.zh-tw.html 13 Dec 2013 05:31:24 -0000 1.13
@@ -11,6 +11,13 @@
<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/why-free.translist" -->
<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.zh-tw.html" -->
+<!--#set var="PO_FILE"
+ value='<a href="http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/po/why-free.zh-tw.po";>
+ http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/po/why-free.zh-tw.po</a>' -->
+ <!--#set var="ORIGINAL_FILE" value="/philosophy/why-free.html" -->
+ <!--#set var="DIFF_FILE" value="/philosophy/po/why-free.zh-tw-diff.html" -->
+ <!--#set var="OUTDATED_SINCE" value="2013-10-14" -->
+ <!--#include virtual="/server/outdated.zh-tw.html" -->
<h2>çºç麽è»é«ä¸ææ主人</h2>
<p>ä½è
︰<a href="http://www.stallman.org/";><strong>Richard
Stallman</strong></a></p>
@@ -224,7 +231,7 @@
<p><!-- timestamp start -->
æ´æ°æé︰
-$Date: 2013/08/31 20:12:50 $
+$Date: 2013/12/13 05:31:24 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
Index: x.ko.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/x.ko.html,v
retrieving revision 1.23
retrieving revision 1.24
diff -u -b -r1.23 -r1.24
--- x.ko.html 31 Aug 2013 20:12:51 -0000 1.23
+++ x.ko.html 13 Dec 2013 05:31:24 -0000 1.24
@@ -13,6 +13,13 @@
<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/x.translist" -->
<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.ko.html" -->
+<!--#set var="PO_FILE"
+ value='<a href="http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/po/x.ko.po";>
+ http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/po/x.ko.po</a>' -->
+ <!--#set var="ORIGINAL_FILE" value="/philosophy/x.html" -->
+ <!--#set var="DIFF_FILE" value="/philosophy/po/x.ko-diff.html" -->
+ <!--#set var="OUTDATED_SINCE" value="2013-10-14" -->
+ <!--#include virtual="/server/outdated.ko.html" -->
<h2>X ìëì° ìì¤í
ì í¨ì </h2>
<p>
@@ -158,7 +165,7 @@
<p><!-- timestamp start -->
ìµì¢
ìì ì¼:
-$Date: 2013/08/31 20:12:51 $
+$Date: 2013/12/13 05:31:24 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
Index: x.nl.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/x.nl.html,v
retrieving revision 1.11
retrieving revision 1.12
diff -u -b -r1.11 -r1.12
--- x.nl.html 31 Aug 2013 20:12:51 -0000 1.11
+++ x.nl.html 13 Dec 2013 05:31:24 -0000 1.12
@@ -15,6 +15,13 @@
<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/x.translist" -->
<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.nl.html" -->
+<!--#set var="PO_FILE"
+ value='<a href="http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/po/x.nl.po";>
+ http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/po/x.nl.po</a>' -->
+ <!--#set var="ORIGINAL_FILE" value="/philosophy/x.html" -->
+ <!--#set var="DIFF_FILE" value="/philosophy/po/x.nl-diff.html" -->
+ <!--#set var="OUTDATED_SINCE" value="2013-10-14" -->
+ <!--#include virtual="/server/outdated.nl.html" -->
<h2>De X Window's Valstrik</h2>
<p>
@@ -207,7 +214,7 @@
<p><!-- timestamp start -->
Bijgewerkt:
-$Date: 2013/08/31 20:12:51 $
+$Date: 2013/12/13 05:31:24 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
Index: po/ipjustice.nl-diff.html
===================================================================
RCS file: po/ipjustice.nl-diff.html
diff -N po/ipjustice.nl-diff.html
--- /dev/null 1 Jan 1970 00:00:00 -0000
+++ po/ipjustice.nl-diff.html 13 Dec 2013 05:31:26 -0000 1.1
@@ -0,0 +1,130 @@
+<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
+ "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd";>
+<!-- Generated by GNUN -->
+<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"; xml:lang="en" lang="en">
+<head>
+<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" />
+<title>/philosophy/ipjustice.html-diff</title>
+<style type="text/css">
+span.removed { background-color: #f22; color: #000; }
+span.inserted { background-color: #2f2; color: #000; }
+</style></head>
+<body><pre>
+<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" -->
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><!-- Parent-Version: 1.75
--></em></ins></span>
+<title>Reject IP Enforcement Directive
+- GNU Project - Free Software <span class="removed"><del><strong>Foundation
(FSF)</title></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Foundation</title></em></ins></span>
+
+<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/ipjustice.translist" -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" -->
+
+<h2>Reject IP Enforcement Directive</h2>
+
+<p>
+A coalition of civil liberties and consumer groups opposes a new
+proposed directive for stricter punishment for copyright and patent
+infringement:
+</p>
+
+<p>
+<a
href="http://ipjustice.org/wp/2008/03/25/ipj-white-paper-acta-2008/">http://ipjustice.org/wp/2008/03/25/ipj-white-paper-acta-2008/</a>
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The FSF also opposes this directive, but we did not sign that
+statement because it accepts too much of what ought to be opposed. EU
+law is already too restrictive, and simply to prevent further changes
+is not enough. It is wrong to stop people from sharing music and
+other published works, and only draconian laws could possibly do the
+job, so it's no surprise to see they are being proposed. But opposing
+this directive without criticizing its unjust motivation is
+insufficient. Even using the term “intellectual property”
+is a point of weakness, because this is
+a <a href="/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#IntellectualProperty">
+propaganda term</a> for those who aim to restrict the public.
+</p>
+
+<span class="removed"><del><strong></div></strong></del></span>
+
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em></div><!-- for id="content", starts
in the include above --></em></ins></span>
+<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
+<div id="footer">
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><p>
+Please</strong></del></span>
+
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><p>Please</em></ins></span> send <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>general</em></ins></span> FSF & GNU inquiries to
+<a <span
class="removed"><del><strong>href="mailto:address@hidden"><em>address@hidden</em></a>.</strong></del></span>
<span
class="inserted"><ins><em>href="mailto:address@hidden"><address@hidden></a>.</em></ins></span>
+There are also <a href="/contact/">other ways to contact</a>
+the FSF.
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><br />
+Please send broken</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Broken</em></ins></span> links and other corrections
or suggestions <span class="inserted"><ins><em>can be sent</em></ins></span>
+to <a <span
class="removed"><del><strong>href="mailto:address@hidden"><em>address@hidden</em></a>.
+</p>
+
+<p></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>href="mailto:address@hidden"><address@hidden></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">
+ <address@hidden></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>. --></em></ins></span>
+Please see the <a
+href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
+README</a> for information on coordinating and submitting translations
+of this <span class="removed"><del><strong>article.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Copyright</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>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</em></ins></span> © 2003, <span
class="removed"><del><strong>2008</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>2008, 2013</em></ins></span> Free Software
Foundation, <span class="removed"><del><strong>Inc.,
+</p>
+<address>51 Franklin St, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110,
USA</address></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Inc.</p></em></ins></span>
+
+<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 <span
class="removed"><del><strong>License</a>.
+</p></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>License</a>.</p></em></ins></span>
+
+<!--#include virtual="/server/bottom-notes.html" -->
+
+<p>Updated:
+<!-- timestamp start -->
+$Date: 2013/12/13 05:31:26 $
+<!-- timestamp end -->
+</p>
+</div>
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><!-- 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."
--></strong></del></span>
+</div>
+</body>
+</html>
+</pre></body></html>
Index: po/netscape-npl.nl-diff.html
===================================================================
RCS file: po/netscape-npl.nl-diff.html
diff -N po/netscape-npl.nl-diff.html
--- /dev/null 1 Jan 1970 00:00:00 -0000
+++ po/netscape-npl.nl-diff.html 13 Dec 2013 05:31:27 -0000 1.1
@@ -0,0 +1,311 @@
+<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
+ "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd";>
+<!-- Generated by GNUN -->
+<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"; xml:lang="en" lang="en">
+<head>
+<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" />
+<title>/philosophy/netscape-npl.html-diff</title>
+<style type="text/css">
+span.removed { background-color: #f22; color: #000; }
+span.inserted { background-color: #2f2; color: #000; }
+</style></head>
+<body><pre>
+<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" -->
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><!-- Parent-Version: 1.75
--></em></ins></span>
+<title>Netscape Public License
+- GNU Project - Free Software <span class="removed"><del><strong>Foundation
(FSF)</title></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Foundation</title></em></ins></span>
+
+<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/netscape-npl.translist" -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" -->
+
+<h2>On the Netscape Public License</h2>
+
+<p>
+by <a href="http://www.stallman.org/"><strong>Richard
Stallman</strong></a></p>
+
+<div class="announcement">
+<blockquote><p>
+(The <a href="/philosophy/netscape-npl-old.html"> original
version</a>
+of this article was written in March 1998 about a draft of the NPL.
+Our first article on the subject was
+<a href="/philosophy/netscape.html">Netscape is considering making
+the Netscape browser free software</a>.)</p></blockquote>
+</div>
+
+<p>
+The Netscape Public License, or NPL, as it was ultimately designed in
+1998, is a free software license—but it has three major flaws.
+One flaw sends a bad philosophical message, another puts the free
+software community in a weak position, while the third creates a major
+practical problem within the free software community. Two of the
+flaws apply to the Mozilla Public License as well. Because of these
+flaws, we urge that you not use the NPL or the MPL for your free
+software.</p>
+
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><h4>1.</strong></del></span>
+
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><h3>1.</em></ins></span> Not all users
are <span class="removed"><del><strong>equal</h4></strong></del></span>
<span class="inserted"><ins><em>equal</h3></em></ins></span>
+
+<p>
+The first problem I noticed in the NPL was that it does not give
+Netscape and the rest of us equal rights, as the GNU GPL does. Under
+the NPL, we can use Netscape's code only as specified in the NPL, but
+Netscape can use our changes in any way at all—even in
+proprietary licensed versions of the software.</p>
+
+<p>
+The problem here is subtle, because this does not make the program
+<span class="removed"><del><strong>non-free.</strong></del></span>
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em>nonfree.</em></ins></span> It does not stop
us from redistributing the program, or
+from changing it; it does not deny us any particular freedom.
+Considered from a purely pragmatic viewpoint, it may not look like a
+problem at all.</p>
+
+<p>
+The problem lies in the deeper message embodied in this condition. It
+denies the idea of cooperation among equals that our community rests
+on, and says that working on a free program means contributing to a
+proprietary software product. Those who accept this condition are
+likely to be changed by it, and the change will not strengthen our
+community.</p>
+
+<p>
+One proposed solution for this asymmetry is to put a time limit on
+it—perhaps three or five years. That would be a big improvement,
+because the time limit would deny the problematical deeper message.</p>
+
+<p>
+The practical effects of this condition are minimized by another
+drawback of the NPL: it is not designed as a thorough copyleft. In
+other words, it does not try very hard to ensure that modifications
+made by users are available as free software.</p>
+
+<p>
+The MPL (Mozilla Public License) does <em>not</em> have this
problem.
+That is the principal difference between the MPL and the NPL.</p>
+
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><h4>2.</strong></del></span>
+
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><h3>2.</em></ins></span> Not a <span
class="removed"><del><strong>copyleft</h4></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>copyleft</h3></em></ins></span>
+
+<p>
+The NPL has the form of a copyleft; it explicitly says that all
+modifications made by users must be released under the NPL. But this
+applies only to modifications to the existing code—not to added
+subroutines, if they are put in separate files. As a practical
+matter, this means it is easy to make proprietary changes if you want
+to: just put the bulk of your code into a separate file, and call the
+collection a Larger Work. Only the subroutine calls added to the old
+files will have to be released under the NPL, and they will not be
+very useful on their own.</p>
+
+<p>
+The lack of real copyleft is not a catastrophe; it does not make the
+software <span class="removed"><del><strong>non-free.</strong></del></span>
<span class="inserted"><ins><em>nonfree.</em></ins></span> For example, the
X.org distribution terms do not
+try to use copyleft at all, yet X.org is free software nonetheless.
+BSD is also non-copylefted free software (although the older BSD terms
+have a <a href="/philosophy/bsd.html">serious drawback</a> and
should
+not be imitated—if you want to release non-copylefted free
+software, please use the X.org terms instead). NPL-covered software
+is also <a href="/philosophy/categories.html">free software</a>
+without being copylefted, and this by itself does not make the NPL
+worse than other non-copyleft free software license.</p>
+
+<p>
+However, while this is not catastrophic, it is nonetheless a drawback.
+And because the NPL looks like a copyleft, some users may be confused
+about it, and might adopt the NPL, thinking that they are obtaining
+the benefits of copyleft for their software, when that is not the
+case. To avoid this outcome, we will need to work hard to educate
+people about an issue that is not easy to explain in a few words.</p>
+
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><h4>3.</strong></del></span>
+
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><h3>3.</em></ins></span> Not compatible
with the <span
class="removed"><del><strong>GPL</h4></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>GPL</h3></em></ins></span>
+
+<p>
+The most serious practical problem in the NPL is that it is
+incompatible with the GNU GPL. It is impossible to combine
+NPL-covered code and GNU GPL-covered code together in one program, not
+even by linking separate object files or libraries; no matter how this
+is done, it has to violate one license or the other.</p>
+
+<p>
+This conflict occurs because the GPL is serious about copyleft: it was
+designed to ensure that all changes and extensions to a free program
+must be free. So it does not leave a loophole for making changes
+proprietary by putting them into a separate file. To close this
+loophole, the GPL does not allow linking the copylefted program with
+code that has other restrictions or conditions—such as the
+NPL.</p>
+
+<p>
+Being incompatible with the GPL does not make a program <span
class="removed"><del><strong>non-free;</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>nonfree;</em></ins></span> it
+does not raise a fundamental ethical issue. But it is likely to
+create a serious problem for the free software community, dividing the
+code base into two collections that cannot be mixed. As a practical
+matter, this problem is very important.</p>
+
+<p>
+Solving this by changing the GPL is possible, but that would entail
+abandoning copyleft—which would do more harm than good. But it
+is possible to solve this problem with a small change in the NPL.
+(See below for a specific way of doing this.)</p>
+
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><h4>4.</strong></del></span>
+
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><h3>4.</em></ins></span> A note about
<span class="removed"><del><strong>names</h4></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>names</h3></em></ins></span>
+<p>
+NPL stands for Netscape Public License, but GPL does not stand for GNU
+Public License. The full name of our license is the GNU General
+Public License, abbreviated GNU GPL. Sometimes people leave out the
+word “GNU” and write just GPL.</p>
+
+<p>
+(This is not a problem, just a fact that you should know.)</p>
+
+<span
class="removed"><del><strong><h4>Conclusion</h4></strong></del></span>
+
+<span
class="inserted"><ins><em><h3>Conclusion</h3></em></ins></span>
+
+<p>
+Since problem 3 is the most serious, I hope that people will politely
+and rationally explain to Netscape the importance of solving it.
+Solutions are available; they just have to decide to use them.</p>
+
+<p>
+Here is a possible way to permit linking NPL-covered code and
+GPL-covered code together. It can be done by adding these two
+paragraphs to the NPL:</p>
+
+<pre>
+A.1. You may distribute a Covered Work under the terms of the GNU
+ General Public License, version 2 or newer, as published by the
+ Free Software Foundation, when it is included in a Larger Work
+ which is as a whole distributed under the terms of the same
+ version of the GNU General Public License.
+
+A.2. If you have received a copy of a Larger Work under the terms of a
+ version or a choice of versions of the GNU General Public
+ License, and you make modifications to some NPL-covered portions
+ of this Larger Work, you have the option of altering these
+ portions to say that their distribution terms are that version or
+ that choice of versions of GNU General Public License.
+</pre>
+<p>
+This allows people to combine NPL-covered code with GPL-covered code,
+and to distribute the combined work under the terms of the GNU GPL.</p>
+
+<p>
+It permits people to release modifications to such combined works
+under the terms of the GNU GPL—but the easiest way to release
+them is under the NPL.</p>
+
+<p>
+When people take advantage of A.2, their changes will be released only
+under the terms of the GNU GPL; so these changes would not be
+available for Netscape to use in proprietary versions. It makes sense
+that Netscape would see this as unfortunate.</p>
+
+<p>
+However, the NPL gives proprietary software developers an easy way to
+make their changes entirely unavailable to Netscape—by putting
+their code into separate files and calling the combination a Larger
+Work. In fact, this is easier, for them, than A.2 is for GPL
+users.</p>
+
+<p>
+If Netscape feels it can live with the trouble of (effectively)
+proprietary modifications, surely the trouble of GPL-covered
+modifications is a small by comparison. If Netscape believes that
+practical considerations will encourage most of the proprietary
+software world to release its changes back to Netscape, without being
+compelled to, the same reasons ought to apply in the free software
+world as well. Netscape should recognize that this change is
+acceptable, and adopt it, to avoid confronting free software
+developers with a serious dilemma.</p>
+
+<span class="removed"><del><strong></div></strong></del></span>
+
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em></div><!-- for id="content", starts
in the include above --></em></ins></span>
+<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
+<div id="footer">
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><p>
+Please</strong></del></span>
+
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><p>Please</em></ins></span> send <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>general</em></ins></span> FSF & GNU inquiries to
+<a <span
class="removed"><del><strong>href="mailto:address@hidden"><em>address@hidden</em></a>.</strong></del></span>
<span
class="inserted"><ins><em>href="mailto:address@hidden"><address@hidden></a>.</em></ins></span>
+There are also <a href="/contact/">other ways to contact</a>
+the FSF.
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><br />
+Please send broken</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Broken</em></ins></span> links and other corrections
or suggestions <span class="inserted"><ins><em>can be sent</em></ins></span>
+to <a <span
class="removed"><del><strong>href="mailto:address@hidden"><em>address@hidden</em></a>.
+</p>
+
+<p></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>href="mailto:address@hidden"><address@hidden></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">
+ <address@hidden></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>. --></em></ins></span>
+Please see the <a
+href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
+README</a> for information on coordinating and submitting translations
+of this <span class="removed"><del><strong>article.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Copyright</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>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</em></ins></span> © 1998, 2003, 2007, <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>2013</em></ins></span> Free Software Foundation,
<span class="removed"><del><strong>Inc.,
+</p>
+<address>51 Franklin St, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110,
USA</address></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Inc.</p></em></ins></span>
+
+<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 <span
class="removed"><del><strong>License</a>.
+</p></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>License</a>.</p></em></ins></span>
+
+<!--#include virtual="/server/bottom-notes.html" -->
+
+<p>Updated:
+<!-- timestamp start -->
+$Date: 2013/12/13 05:31:27 $
+<!-- timestamp end -->
+</p>
+</div>
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><!-- 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."
--></strong></del></span>
+</div>
+</body>
+</html>
+</pre></body></html>
Index: po/no-word-attachments.nl-diff.html
===================================================================
RCS file: po/no-word-attachments.nl-diff.html
diff -N po/no-word-attachments.nl-diff.html
--- /dev/null 1 Jan 1970 00:00:00 -0000
+++ po/no-word-attachments.nl-diff.html 13 Dec 2013 05:31:27 -0000 1.1
@@ -0,0 +1,365 @@
+<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
+ "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd";>
+<!-- Generated by GNUN -->
+<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"; xml:lang="en" lang="en">
+<head>
+<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" />
+<title>/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html-diff</title>
+<style type="text/css">
+span.removed { background-color: #f22; color: #000; }
+span.inserted { background-color: #2f2; color: #000; }
+</style></head>
+<body><pre>
+<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" -->
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><!-- Parent-Version: 1.75
--></em></ins></span>
+<title>We Can Put an End to Word Attachments
+- GNU Project - Free Software <span class="removed"><del><strong>Foundation
(FSF)</title></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Foundation</title></em></ins></span>
+<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="/philosophy/po/no-word-attachments.translist" -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" -->
+
+<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/anonymous-response.html">Here is a response
+letter</a> 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>
+
+<span class="removed"><del><strong></div></strong></del></span>
+
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em></div><!-- for id="content", starts
in the include above --></em></ins></span>
+<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
+<div id="footer">
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><p>
+Please</strong></del></span>
+
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><p>Please</em></ins></span> send <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>general</em></ins></span> 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.
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><br />
+Please send broken</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Broken</em></ins></span> links and other corrections
or suggestions <span class="inserted"><ins><em>can be sent</em></ins></span>
+to <a <span
class="removed"><del><strong>href="mailto:address@hidden"><address@hidden></a>.
+</p>
+
+<p></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>href="mailto:address@hidden"><address@hidden></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">
+ <address@hidden></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>. --></em></ins></span>
+Please see the <a
+href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
+README</a> for information on coordinating and submitting translations
+of this <span class="removed"><del><strong>article.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Copyright</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>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</em></ins></span> © 2002, 2007 Richard M. <span
class="removed"><del><strong>Stallman
+<br />
+This</strong></del></span> <span class="inserted"><ins><em>Stallman</p>
+
+<p>This</em></ins></span> 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 <span
class="removed"><del><strong>License</a>.
+</p></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>License</a>.</p></em></ins></span>
+
+<!--#include virtual="/server/bottom-notes.html" -->
+
+<p>Updated:
+<!-- timestamp start -->
+$Date: 2013/12/13 05:31:27 $
+<!-- timestamp end -->
+</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+</body>
+</html>
+</pre></body></html>
Index: po/pirate-party.cs-diff.html
===================================================================
RCS file: po/pirate-party.cs-diff.html
diff -N po/pirate-party.cs-diff.html
--- /dev/null 1 Jan 1970 00:00:00 -0000
+++ po/pirate-party.cs-diff.html 13 Dec 2013 05:31:27 -0000 1.1
@@ -0,0 +1,201 @@
+<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
+ "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd";>
+<!-- Generated by GNUN -->
+<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"; xml:lang="en" lang="en">
+<head>
+<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" />
+<title>/philosophy/pirate-party.html-diff</title>
+<style type="text/css">
+span.removed { background-color: #f22; color: #000; }
+span.inserted { background-color: #2f2; color: #000; }
+</style></head>
+<body><pre>
+<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" -->
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><!-- Parent-Version: 1.75
--></em></ins></span>
+<title>How the Swedish Pirate Party Platform Backfires on Free <span
class="removed"><del><strong>Software</title></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Software
+- GNU Project - Free Software Foundation</title></em></ins></span>
+<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/pirate-party.translist" -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" -->
+<h2>How the Swedish Pirate Party Platform Backfires on Free
Software</h2>
+
+<p>by <a href="http://www.stallman.org/">Richard
Stallman</a></p>
+
+<blockquote>
+<p>
+Note: each Pirate Party has its own platform. They all call for
+reducing copyright power, but the specifics vary. This issue may
+not apply to the other parties' positions.
+</p>
+</blockquote>
+
+<p>The bullying of the copyright industry in Sweden inspired the
+launch of the first political party whose platform is to reduce
+copyright restrictions: the Pirate Party. Its platform includes the
+prohibition of Digital Restrictions Management, legalization of
+noncommercial sharing of published works, and shortening of copyright
+for commercial use to a five-year period. Five years after
+publication, any published work would go into the public domain.</p>
+
+<p>I support these changes, in general; but the specific combination
+chosen by the Swedish Pirate Party backfires ironically in the special
+case of free software. I'm sure that they did not intend to hurt free
+software, but that's what would happen.</p>
+
+<p>The GNU General Public License and other copyleft licenses use
+copyright law to defend freedom for every user. The GPL permits
+everyone to publish modified works, but only under the same license.
+Redistribution of the unmodified work must also preserve the license.
+And all redistributors must give users access to the software's source
+code.</p>
+
+<p>How would the Swedish Pirate Party's platform affect copylefted
+free software? After five years, its source code would go into the
+public domain, and proprietary software developers would be able to
+include it in their programs. But what about the reverse case?</p>
+
+<p>Proprietary software is restricted by EULAs, not just by copyright,
+and the users don't have the source code. Even if copyright permits
+noncommercial sharing, the EULA may forbid it. In addition, the
+users, not having the source code, do not control what the program
+does when they run it. To run such a program is to surrender your
+freedom and give the developer control over you.</p>
+
+<p>So what would be the effect of terminating this program's copyright
+after 5 years? This would not require the developer to release source
+code, and presumably most will never do so. Users, still denied the
+source code, would still be unable to use the program in freedom. The
+program could even have a “time bomb” in it to make it
+stop working after 5 years, in which case the “public
+domain” copies would not run at all.</p>
+
+<p>Thus, the Pirate Party's proposal would give proprietary software
+developers the use of GPL-covered source code after 5 years, but it
+would not give free software developers the use of proprietary source
+code, not after 5 years or even 50 years. The Free World would get
+the bad, but not the good. The difference between source code and
+object code and the practice of using EULAs would give proprietary
+software an effective exception from the general rule of 5-year
+copyright — one that free software does not share.</p>
+
+<p>We also use copyright to partially deflect the danger of software
+patents. We cannot make our programs safe from them — no
+program is ever safe from software patents in a country which allows
+them — but at least we prevent them from being used to make the
+program effectively <span
class="removed"><del><strong>non-free.</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>nonfree.</em></ins></span> The Swedish Pirate Party
proposes to
+abolish software patents, and if that is done, this issue would go
+away. But until that is achieved, we must not lose our only defense
+for protection from patents.</p>
+
+<p>Once the Swedish Pirate Party had announced its platform, free
+software developers noticed this effect and began proposing a special
+rule for free software: to make copyright last longer for free
+software, so that it can continue to be copylefted. This explicit
+exception for free software would counterbalance the effective
+exception for proprietary software. Even ten years ought to be
+enough, I think. However, the proposal met with resistance from the
+Pirate Party's leaders, who objected to the idea of a longer copyright
+for a special case.</p>
+
+<p>I could support a law that would make GPL-covered software's source
+code available in the public domain after 5 years, provided it has the
+same effect on proprietary software's source code. After all,
+copyleft is a means to an end (users' freedom), not an end in itself.
+And I'd rather not be an advocate for a stronger copyright.</p>
+
+<p>So I proposed that the Pirate Party platform require proprietary
+software's source code to be put in escrow when the binaries are
+released. The escrowed source code would then be released in the
+public domain after 5 years. Rather than making free software an
+official exception to the 5-year copyright rule, this would eliminate
+proprietary software's unofficial exception. Either way, the result
+is fair.</p>
+
+<p>A Pirate Party supporter proposed a more general variant of the
+first suggestion: a general scheme to make copyright last longer as
+the public is granted more freedoms in using the work. The advantage
+of this is that free software becomes part of a general pattern of
+varying copyright term, rather than a lone exception.</p>
+
+<p>I'd prefer the escrow solution, but any of these methods would
+avoid a prejudicial effect specifically against free software. There
+may be other solutions that would also do the job. One way or
+another, the Pirate Party of Sweden should avoid placing a handicap on
+a movement to defend the public from marauding giants.</p>
+<span class="removed"><del><strong></div></strong></del></span>
+
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em></div><!-- for id="content", starts
in the include above --></em></ins></span>
+<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
+<div id="footer">
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><p>
+Please</strong></del></span>
+
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><p>Please</em></ins></span> send <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>general</em></ins></span> 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.
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><br />
+Please send broken</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Broken</em></ins></span> links and other corrections
or suggestions <span class="inserted"><ins><em>can be sent</em></ins></span>
+to <a <span
class="removed"><del><strong>href="mailto:address@hidden"><address@hidden></a>.
+</p>
+
+<p></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>href="mailto:address@hidden"><address@hidden></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">
+ <address@hidden></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>. --></em></ins></span>
+Please see the <a
+href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
+README</a> for information on coordinating and submitting translations
+of this <span class="removed"><del><strong>article.
+</p></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>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. --></em></ins></span>
+
+<p>Copyright © 2009 Richard Stallman</p>
+
+<p>This <span class="removed"><del><strong>work</strong></del></span>
<span class="inserted"><ins><em>page</em></ins></span> is licensed under <span
class="removed"><del><strong>the Creative</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>a <a rel="license"
+href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/us/">Creative</em></ins></span>
+Commons <span class="removed"><del><strong>Attribution-No
+Derivative Works</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Attribution-NoDerivs</em></ins></span> 3.0 United
States <span class="removed"><del><strong>License. To view a copy of this
+license,
+visit <a
href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/us/">http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/us/</a>
+or send a letter to Creative Commons, 171 Second Street, Suite 300,
+San Francisco, California, 94105, USA.</p></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>License</a>.</p></em></ins></span>
+
+<!--#include virtual="/server/bottom-notes.html" -->
+
+<p>Updated:
+<!-- timestamp start -->
+$Date: 2013/12/13 05:31:27 $
+<!-- timestamp end -->
+</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+</body>
+</html>
+</pre></body></html>
Index: po/pragmatic.hr-diff.html
===================================================================
RCS file: po/pragmatic.hr-diff.html
diff -N po/pragmatic.hr-diff.html
--- /dev/null 1 Jan 1970 00:00:00 -0000
+++ po/pragmatic.hr-diff.html 13 Dec 2013 05:31:27 -0000 1.1
@@ -0,0 +1,255 @@
+<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
+ "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd";>
+<!-- Generated by GNUN -->
+<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"; xml:lang="en" lang="en">
+<head>
+<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" />
+<title>/philosophy/pragmatic.html-diff</title>
+<style type="text/css">
+span.removed { background-color: #f22; color: #000; }
+span.inserted { background-color: #2f2; color: #000; }
+</style></head>
+<body><pre>
+<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" -->
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><!-- Parent-Version: 1.75
--></em></ins></span>
+<title>Copyleft: Pragmatic Idealism
+- GNU Project - Free Software <span class="removed"><del><strong>Foundation
(FSF)</title></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Foundation</title></em></ins></span>
+
+<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/pragmatic.translist" -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" -->
+
+<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 />
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><h4>This</strong></del></span>
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><p>This</em></ins></span> 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. <span
class="removed"><del><strong>Stallman</cite></a>.</h4>
+
+</div></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Stallman</cite></a>.</p>
+
+</div><!-- for id="content", starts in the include above
--></em></ins></span>
+<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
+<div id="footer">
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><p>
+Please</strong></del></span>
+
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><p>Please</em></ins></span> send <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>general</em></ins></span> 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.
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><br />
+Please send broken</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Broken</em></ins></span> links and other corrections
or suggestions <span class="inserted"><ins><em>can be sent</em></ins></span>
+to <a <span
class="removed"><del><strong>href="mailto:address@hidden"><address@hidden></a>.
+</p>
+
+<p></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>href="mailto:address@hidden"><address@hidden></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">
+ <address@hidden></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>. --></em></ins></span>
+Please see the <a
+href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
+README</a> for information on coordinating and submitting translations
+of this <span class="removed"><del><strong>article.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Copyright</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>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</em></ins></span> © 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 <span
class="removed"><del><strong>License</a>.
+</p></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>License</a>.</p></em></ins></span>
+
+<!--#include virtual="/server/bottom-notes.html" -->
+
+<p>Updated:
+<!-- timestamp start -->
+$Date: 2013/12/13 05:31:27 $
+<!-- timestamp end -->
+</p>
+</div>
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><!-- 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."
--></strong></del></span>
+</div>
+</body>
+</html>
+</pre></body></html>
Index: po/pragmatic.ko-diff.html
===================================================================
RCS file: po/pragmatic.ko-diff.html
diff -N po/pragmatic.ko-diff.html
--- /dev/null 1 Jan 1970 00:00:00 -0000
+++ po/pragmatic.ko-diff.html 13 Dec 2013 05:31:27 -0000 1.1
@@ -0,0 +1,255 @@
+<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
+ "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd";>
+<!-- Generated by GNUN -->
+<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"; xml:lang="en" lang="en">
+<head>
+<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" />
+<title>/philosophy/pragmatic.html-diff</title>
+<style type="text/css">
+span.removed { background-color: #f22; color: #000; }
+span.inserted { background-color: #2f2; color: #000; }
+</style></head>
+<body><pre>
+<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" -->
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><!-- Parent-Version: 1.75
--></em></ins></span>
+<title>Copyleft: Pragmatic Idealism
+- GNU Project - Free Software <span class="removed"><del><strong>Foundation
(FSF)</title></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Foundation</title></em></ins></span>
+
+<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/pragmatic.translist" -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" -->
+
+<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 />
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><h4>This</strong></del></span>
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><p>This</em></ins></span> 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. <span
class="removed"><del><strong>Stallman</cite></a>.</h4>
+
+</div></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Stallman</cite></a>.</p>
+
+</div><!-- for id="content", starts in the include above
--></em></ins></span>
+<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
+<div id="footer">
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><p>
+Please</strong></del></span>
+
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><p>Please</em></ins></span> send <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>general</em></ins></span> 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.
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><br />
+Please send broken</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Broken</em></ins></span> links and other corrections
or suggestions <span class="inserted"><ins><em>can be sent</em></ins></span>
+to <a <span
class="removed"><del><strong>href="mailto:address@hidden"><address@hidden></a>.
+</p>
+
+<p></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>href="mailto:address@hidden"><address@hidden></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">
+ <address@hidden></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>. --></em></ins></span>
+Please see the <a
+href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
+README</a> for information on coordinating and submitting translations
+of this <span class="removed"><del><strong>article.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Copyright</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>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</em></ins></span> © 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 <span
class="removed"><del><strong>License</a>.
+</p></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>License</a>.</p></em></ins></span>
+
+<!--#include virtual="/server/bottom-notes.html" -->
+
+<p>Updated:
+<!-- timestamp start -->
+$Date: 2013/12/13 05:31:27 $
+<!-- timestamp end -->
+</p>
+</div>
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><!-- 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."
--></strong></del></span>
+</div>
+</body>
+</html>
+</pre></body></html>
Index: po/pragmatic.nl-diff.html
===================================================================
RCS file: po/pragmatic.nl-diff.html
diff -N po/pragmatic.nl-diff.html
--- /dev/null 1 Jan 1970 00:00:00 -0000
+++ po/pragmatic.nl-diff.html 13 Dec 2013 05:31:28 -0000 1.1
@@ -0,0 +1,255 @@
+<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
+ "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd";>
+<!-- Generated by GNUN -->
+<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"; xml:lang="en" lang="en">
+<head>
+<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" />
+<title>/philosophy/pragmatic.html-diff</title>
+<style type="text/css">
+span.removed { background-color: #f22; color: #000; }
+span.inserted { background-color: #2f2; color: #000; }
+</style></head>
+<body><pre>
+<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" -->
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><!-- Parent-Version: 1.75
--></em></ins></span>
+<title>Copyleft: Pragmatic Idealism
+- GNU Project - Free Software <span class="removed"><del><strong>Foundation
(FSF)</title></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Foundation</title></em></ins></span>
+
+<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/pragmatic.translist" -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" -->
+
+<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 />
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><h4>This</strong></del></span>
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><p>This</em></ins></span> 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. <span
class="removed"><del><strong>Stallman</cite></a>.</h4>
+
+</div></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Stallman</cite></a>.</p>
+
+</div><!-- for id="content", starts in the include above
--></em></ins></span>
+<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
+<div id="footer">
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><p>
+Please</strong></del></span>
+
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><p>Please</em></ins></span> send <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>general</em></ins></span> 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.
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><br />
+Please send broken</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Broken</em></ins></span> links and other corrections
or suggestions <span class="inserted"><ins><em>can be sent</em></ins></span>
+to <a <span
class="removed"><del><strong>href="mailto:address@hidden"><address@hidden></a>.
+</p>
+
+<p></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>href="mailto:address@hidden"><address@hidden></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">
+ <address@hidden></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>. --></em></ins></span>
+Please see the <a
+href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
+README</a> for information on coordinating and submitting translations
+of this <span class="removed"><del><strong>article.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Copyright</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>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</em></ins></span> © 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 <span
class="removed"><del><strong>License</a>.
+</p></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>License</a>.</p></em></ins></span>
+
+<!--#include virtual="/server/bottom-notes.html" -->
+
+<p>Updated:
+<!-- timestamp start -->
+$Date: 2013/12/13 05:31:28 $
+<!-- timestamp end -->
+</p>
+</div>
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><!-- 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."
--></strong></del></span>
+</div>
+</body>
+</html>
+</pre></body></html>
Index: po/social-inertia.hr-diff.html
===================================================================
RCS file: po/social-inertia.hr-diff.html
diff -N po/social-inertia.hr-diff.html
--- /dev/null 1 Jan 1970 00:00:00 -0000
+++ po/social-inertia.hr-diff.html 13 Dec 2013 05:31:28 -0000 1.1
@@ -0,0 +1,156 @@
+<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
+ "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd";>
+<!-- Generated by GNUN -->
+<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"; xml:lang="en" lang="en">
+<head>
+<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" />
+<title>/philosophy/social-inertia.html-diff</title>
+<style type="text/css">
+span.removed { background-color: #f22; color: #000; }
+span.inserted { background-color: #2f2; color: #000; }
+</style></head>
+<body><pre>
+<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" -->
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><!-- Parent-Version: 1.75
--></em></ins></span>
+<title>Overcoming Social Inertia
+- GNU Project - Free Software <span class="removed"><del><strong>Foundation
(FSF)</title></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Foundation</title></em></ins></span>
+<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/social-inertia.translist" -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" -->
+<h2>Overcoming Social Inertia</h2>
+
+<p>by <a href="http://www.stallman.org/"><strong>Richard
+Stallman</strong></a></p>
+
+<p>
+Almost two decades have passed since the combination of GNU and Linux first
made
+it possible to use a PC in freedom. We have come a long way since then. Now
you can even buy a laptop with GNU/Linux preinstalled from
+more than one hardware vendor—although the systems they ship are not
+entirely free software. So what holds us back from total success?</p>
+
+<p>
+The main obstacle to the triumph of software freedom is social
+inertia. It exists in many forms, and you have surely seen some of
+them. Examples include devices that only work on Windows, commercial
+web sites accessible only with Windows, and the BBC's iPlayer
+handcuffware, which runs only on Windows. If you value short-term
+convenience instead of freedom, you might consider these reason enough
+to use Windows. Most companies currently run Windows, so students who
+think short-term want to learn how to use it and ask their schools to
+teach it. Schools teach Windows, produce graduates that are used to
+using Windows, and this encourages businesses to use Windows.</p>
+
+<p>Microsoft actively nurtures this inertia: it encourages schools to
+inculcate dependency on Windows, and contracts to set up web sites
+that then turn out to work only with Internet Explorer.</p>
+
+<p>
+A few years ago, Microsoft ads argued that Windows was cheaper to run
+than GNU/Linux. Their comparisons were debunked, but it is worth
+noting the deeper flaw in their argument, the implicit premise which
+cites a form of social inertia: “Currently, more technical
+people know Windows than GNU/Linux.” People who value their
+freedom would not give it up to save money, but many business
+executives believe ideologically that everything they possess, even
+their freedom, should be for sale.</p>
+
+<p>
+Social inertia consists of people who have given in to social inertia.
+When you surrender to social inertia, you become part of the pressure
+it exerts on others; when you resist it, you reduce it. We conquer
+social inertia by identifying it, and resolving not to be part of
+it.</p>
+
+<p>
+Here a weakness holds our community back: most GNU/Linux
+users have never even heard the ideas
+of freedom that motivated the development of GNU, so they still judge
+matters based on short-term convenience rather than on their freedom.
+This makes them vulnerable to being led by the nose by social
+inertia, so that they become part of the inertia.</p>
+
+<p>
+To build our community's strength to resist, we need to talk about
+free software and freedom—not merely about the practical
+benefits that open source supporters cite. As more people recognize
+what they need to do to overcome the inertia, we will make more
+progress.</p>
+
+<span class="removed"><del><strong></div></strong></del></span>
+
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em></div><!-- for id="content", starts
in the include above --></em></ins></span>
+<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
+<div id="footer">
+
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><p>
+Please</strong></del></span>
+
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><p>Please</em></ins></span> send <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>general</em></ins></span> FSF & GNU inquiries to
+<a <span
class="removed"><del><strong>href="mailto:address@hidden"><em>address@hidden</em></a>.</strong></del></span>
<span
class="inserted"><ins><em>href="mailto:address@hidden"><address@hidden></a>.</em></ins></span>
+There are also <a href="/contact/">other ways to contact</a>
+the FSF.
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><br />
+Please send broken</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Broken</em></ins></span> links and other corrections
or suggestions <span class="inserted"><ins><em>can be sent</em></ins></span>
+to <a <span
class="removed"><del><strong>href="mailto:address@hidden"><em>address@hidden</em></a>.
+</p>
+
+<p></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>href="mailto:address@hidden"><address@hidden></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">
+ <address@hidden></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>. --></em></ins></span>
+Please see the <a
+href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
+README</a> for information on coordinating and submitting translations
+of this <span class="removed"><del><strong>article.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Copyright</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>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</em></ins></span> © 2007 Richard <span
class="removed"><del><strong>Stallman
+</p></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Stallman</p></em></ins></span>
+
+<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 <span
class="removed"><del><strong>License</a>.
+</p></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>License</a>.</p></em></ins></span>
+
+<!--#include virtual="/server/bottom-notes.html" -->
+
+<p>Updated:
+<!-- timestamp start -->
+$Date: 2013/12/13 05:31:28 $
+<!-- timestamp end -->
+</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+</body>
+</html>
+</pre></body></html>
Index: po/the-danger-of-ebooks.hr-diff.html
===================================================================
RCS file: po/the-danger-of-ebooks.hr-diff.html
diff -N po/the-danger-of-ebooks.hr-diff.html
--- /dev/null 1 Jan 1970 00:00:00 -0000
+++ po/the-danger-of-ebooks.hr-diff.html 13 Dec 2013 05:31:28 -0000
1.1
@@ -0,0 +1,158 @@
+<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
+ "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd";>
+<!-- Generated by GNUN -->
+<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"; xml:lang="en" lang="en">
+<head>
+<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" />
+<title>/philosophy/the-danger-of-ebooks.html-diff</title>
+<style type="text/css">
+span.removed { background-color: #f22; color: #000; }
+span.inserted { background-color: #2f2; color: #000; }
+</style></head>
+<body><pre>
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><!-- Parent-Version: 1.57
--></strong></del></span><!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" -->
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><!-- Parent-Version: 1.75
--></em></ins></span>
+<title>The Danger of E-Books
+- GNU Project - Free Software Foundation</title>
+<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/the-danger-of-ebooks.translist" -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" -->
+<h2>The Danger of E-Books</h2>
+
+<div style="text-align: center; font-size: 110%;text-shadow: 0 0 0.2em
#fff; width: 300px; float: right; margin: 12px; background-color: #a0f112;
color: #353831; padding: 1em;"><a
href="http://defectivebydesign.org/ebooks.html">Join our mailing list about
the dangers of eBooks</a>.</div>
+
+<p>In an age where business dominates our governments and writes our
laws,
+every technological advance offers business an opportunity to impose new
+restrictions on the public. Technologies that could have empowered us are
+used to chain us instead.</p>
+
+<p>With printed books,</p>
+<ul>
+<li>You can buy one with cash, anonymously.</li>
+<li>Then you own it.</li>
+<li>You are not required to sign a license that restricts your use of
it.</li>
+<li>The format is known, and no proprietary technology is needed to read
the
+book.</li>
+<li>You can give, lend or sell the book to another.</li>
+<li>You can, physically, scan and copy the book, and it's sometimes
lawful
+under copyright.</li>
+<li>Nobody has the power to destroy your book.</li>
+</ul>
+
+<p>Contrast that with Amazon e-books (fairly typical):</p>
+<ul>
+<li>Amazon requires users to identify themselves to get an
e-book.</li>
+<li>In some countries, including the US, Amazon says the user cannot
+own the e-book.</li>
+<li>Amazon requires the user to accept a restrictive license on use of
the
+e-book.</li>
+<li>The format is secret, and only proprietary user-restricting software
can
+read it at all.</li>
+<li>An ersatz <span
class="removed"><del><strong>"lending"</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>“lending”</em></ins></span> is allowed
for some books, for a limited time, but
+only by specifying by name another user of the same system. No giving or
+selling.</li>
+<li>To copy the e-book is impossible due to
+<a href="/philosophy/right-to-read.html">Digital Restrictions
Management</a>
+in the player and prohibited by the license, which is more restrictive than
+copyright law.</li>
+<li>Amazon can remotely delete the e-book using a back door. It used
this
+back door in 2009 to delete thousands of copies of George Orwell's
1984.</li>
+</ul>
+
+<p>Even one of these infringements makes e-books a step backward from
+printed books. We must reject e-books until they respect our freedom.</p>
+
+<p>The e-book companies say denying our traditional freedoms is
+necessary to continue to pay authors. The current copyright system
+supports those companies handsomely and most authors badly. We can
+support authors better in other ways that don't require curtailing our
+freedom, and even legalize sharing. Two methods I've suggested
+are:</p>
+
+<ul>
+<li>To distribute tax funds to authors based on the cube root of each
+author's popularity. See
+<a href="http://stallman.org/articles/internet-sharing-license.en.html">
+http://stallman.org/articles/internet-sharing-license.en.html</a>.</li>
+<li>To design players so users can send authors anonymous voluntary
payments.</li>
+</ul>
+
+<p>E-books need not attack our freedom (Project Gutenberg's e-books
don't),
+but they will if companies get to decide. It's up to us to stop them.</p>
+
+<p>Join the fight: sign up
+at <a href="http://DefectiveByDesign.org/ebooks.html">
+http://DefectiveByDesign.org/ebooks.html</a>.</p>
+
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><!-- 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".
--></strong></del></span>
+
+</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 <span class="removed"><del><strong>FSF.<br />
+Please send broken</strong></del></span> <span class="inserted"><ins><em>FSF.
Broken</em></ins></span> links and other corrections or suggestions <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>can be sent</em></ins></span>
+to <a
href="mailto:address@hidden"><address@hidden></a>.</p>
+
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><p>Please</strong></del></span>
+
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><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">
+ <address@hidden></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</em></ins></span> see the <a
+href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
+README</a> for information on coordinating and submitting translations
+of this article.</p>
+
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><!-- 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. --></em></ins></span>
+
+<p>Copyright © 2011 Richard Stallman</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>
+
+<!--#include virtual="/server/bottom-notes.html" -->
+
+<p>Updated:
+<!-- timestamp start -->
+$Date: 2013/12/13 05:31:28 $
+<!-- timestamp end -->
+</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+</body>
+</html>
+</pre></body></html>
Index: po/the-danger-of-ebooks.ml-diff.html
===================================================================
RCS file: po/the-danger-of-ebooks.ml-diff.html
diff -N po/the-danger-of-ebooks.ml-diff.html
--- /dev/null 1 Jan 1970 00:00:00 -0000
+++ po/the-danger-of-ebooks.ml-diff.html 13 Dec 2013 05:31:28 -0000
1.1
@@ -0,0 +1,158 @@
+<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
+ "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd";>
+<!-- Generated by GNUN -->
+<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"; xml:lang="en" lang="en">
+<head>
+<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" />
+<title>/philosophy/the-danger-of-ebooks.html-diff</title>
+<style type="text/css">
+span.removed { background-color: #f22; color: #000; }
+span.inserted { background-color: #2f2; color: #000; }
+</style></head>
+<body><pre>
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><!-- Parent-Version: 1.57
--></strong></del></span><!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" -->
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><!-- Parent-Version: 1.75
--></em></ins></span>
+<title>The Danger of E-Books
+- GNU Project - Free Software Foundation</title>
+<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/the-danger-of-ebooks.translist" -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" -->
+<h2>The Danger of E-Books</h2>
+
+<div style="text-align: center; font-size: 110%;text-shadow: 0 0 0.2em
#fff; width: 300px; float: right; margin: 12px; background-color: #a0f112;
color: #353831; padding: 1em;"><a
href="http://defectivebydesign.org/ebooks.html">Join our mailing list about
the dangers of eBooks</a>.</div>
+
+<p>In an age where business dominates our governments and writes our
laws,
+every technological advance offers business an opportunity to impose new
+restrictions on the public. Technologies that could have empowered us are
+used to chain us instead.</p>
+
+<p>With printed books,</p>
+<ul>
+<li>You can buy one with cash, anonymously.</li>
+<li>Then you own it.</li>
+<li>You are not required to sign a license that restricts your use of
it.</li>
+<li>The format is known, and no proprietary technology is needed to read
the
+book.</li>
+<li>You can give, lend or sell the book to another.</li>
+<li>You can, physically, scan and copy the book, and it's sometimes
lawful
+under copyright.</li>
+<li>Nobody has the power to destroy your book.</li>
+</ul>
+
+<p>Contrast that with Amazon e-books (fairly typical):</p>
+<ul>
+<li>Amazon requires users to identify themselves to get an
e-book.</li>
+<li>In some countries, including the US, Amazon says the user cannot
+own the e-book.</li>
+<li>Amazon requires the user to accept a restrictive license on use of
the
+e-book.</li>
+<li>The format is secret, and only proprietary user-restricting software
can
+read it at all.</li>
+<li>An ersatz <span
class="removed"><del><strong>"lending"</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>“lending”</em></ins></span> is allowed
for some books, for a limited time, but
+only by specifying by name another user of the same system. No giving or
+selling.</li>
+<li>To copy the e-book is impossible due to
+<a href="/philosophy/right-to-read.html">Digital Restrictions
Management</a>
+in the player and prohibited by the license, which is more restrictive than
+copyright law.</li>
+<li>Amazon can remotely delete the e-book using a back door. It used
this
+back door in 2009 to delete thousands of copies of George Orwell's
1984.</li>
+</ul>
+
+<p>Even one of these infringements makes e-books a step backward from
+printed books. We must reject e-books until they respect our freedom.</p>
+
+<p>The e-book companies say denying our traditional freedoms is
+necessary to continue to pay authors. The current copyright system
+supports those companies handsomely and most authors badly. We can
+support authors better in other ways that don't require curtailing our
+freedom, and even legalize sharing. Two methods I've suggested
+are:</p>
+
+<ul>
+<li>To distribute tax funds to authors based on the cube root of each
+author's popularity. See
+<a href="http://stallman.org/articles/internet-sharing-license.en.html">
+http://stallman.org/articles/internet-sharing-license.en.html</a>.</li>
+<li>To design players so users can send authors anonymous voluntary
payments.</li>
+</ul>
+
+<p>E-books need not attack our freedom (Project Gutenberg's e-books
don't),
+but they will if companies get to decide. It's up to us to stop them.</p>
+
+<p>Join the fight: sign up
+at <a href="http://DefectiveByDesign.org/ebooks.html">
+http://DefectiveByDesign.org/ebooks.html</a>.</p>
+
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><!-- 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".
--></strong></del></span>
+
+</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 <span class="removed"><del><strong>FSF.<br />
+Please send broken</strong></del></span> <span class="inserted"><ins><em>FSF.
Broken</em></ins></span> links and other corrections or suggestions <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>can be sent</em></ins></span>
+to <a
href="mailto:address@hidden"><address@hidden></a>.</p>
+
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><p>Please</strong></del></span>
+
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><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">
+ <address@hidden></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</em></ins></span> see the <a
+href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
+README</a> for information on coordinating and submitting translations
+of this article.</p>
+
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><!-- 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. --></em></ins></span>
+
+<p>Copyright © 2011 Richard Stallman</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>
+
+<!--#include virtual="/server/bottom-notes.html" -->
+
+<p>Updated:
+<!-- timestamp start -->
+$Date: 2013/12/13 05:31:28 $
+<!-- timestamp end -->
+</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+</body>
+</html>
+</pre></body></html>
Index: po/the-danger-of-ebooks.pl-diff.html
===================================================================
RCS file: po/the-danger-of-ebooks.pl-diff.html
diff -N po/the-danger-of-ebooks.pl-diff.html
--- /dev/null 1 Jan 1970 00:00:00 -0000
+++ po/the-danger-of-ebooks.pl-diff.html 13 Dec 2013 05:31:28 -0000
1.1
@@ -0,0 +1,158 @@
+<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
+ "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd";>
+<!-- Generated by GNUN -->
+<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"; xml:lang="en" lang="en">
+<head>
+<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" />
+<title>/philosophy/the-danger-of-ebooks.html-diff</title>
+<style type="text/css">
+span.removed { background-color: #f22; color: #000; }
+span.inserted { background-color: #2f2; color: #000; }
+</style></head>
+<body><pre>
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><!-- Parent-Version: 1.57
--></strong></del></span><!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" -->
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><!-- Parent-Version: 1.75
--></em></ins></span>
+<title>The Danger of E-Books
+- GNU Project - Free Software Foundation</title>
+<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/the-danger-of-ebooks.translist" -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" -->
+<h2>The Danger of E-Books</h2>
+
+<div style="text-align: center; font-size: 110%;text-shadow: 0 0 0.2em
#fff; width: 300px; float: right; margin: 12px; background-color: #a0f112;
color: #353831; padding: 1em;"><a
href="http://defectivebydesign.org/ebooks.html">Join our mailing list about
the dangers of eBooks</a>.</div>
+
+<p>In an age where business dominates our governments and writes our
laws,
+every technological advance offers business an opportunity to impose new
+restrictions on the public. Technologies that could have empowered us are
+used to chain us instead.</p>
+
+<p>With printed books,</p>
+<ul>
+<li>You can buy one with cash, anonymously.</li>
+<li>Then you own it.</li>
+<li>You are not required to sign a license that restricts your use of
it.</li>
+<li>The format is known, and no proprietary technology is needed to read
the
+book.</li>
+<li>You can give, lend or sell the book to another.</li>
+<li>You can, physically, scan and copy the book, and it's sometimes
lawful
+under copyright.</li>
+<li>Nobody has the power to destroy your book.</li>
+</ul>
+
+<p>Contrast that with Amazon e-books (fairly typical):</p>
+<ul>
+<li>Amazon requires users to identify themselves to get an
e-book.</li>
+<li>In some countries, including the US, Amazon says the user cannot
+own the e-book.</li>
+<li>Amazon requires the user to accept a restrictive license on use of
the
+e-book.</li>
+<li>The format is secret, and only proprietary user-restricting software
can
+read it at all.</li>
+<li>An ersatz <span
class="removed"><del><strong>"lending"</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>“lending”</em></ins></span> is allowed
for some books, for a limited time, but
+only by specifying by name another user of the same system. No giving or
+selling.</li>
+<li>To copy the e-book is impossible due to
+<a href="/philosophy/right-to-read.html">Digital Restrictions
Management</a>
+in the player and prohibited by the license, which is more restrictive than
+copyright law.</li>
+<li>Amazon can remotely delete the e-book using a back door. It used
this
+back door in 2009 to delete thousands of copies of George Orwell's
1984.</li>
+</ul>
+
+<p>Even one of these infringements makes e-books a step backward from
+printed books. We must reject e-books until they respect our freedom.</p>
+
+<p>The e-book companies say denying our traditional freedoms is
+necessary to continue to pay authors. The current copyright system
+supports those companies handsomely and most authors badly. We can
+support authors better in other ways that don't require curtailing our
+freedom, and even legalize sharing. Two methods I've suggested
+are:</p>
+
+<ul>
+<li>To distribute tax funds to authors based on the cube root of each
+author's popularity. See
+<a href="http://stallman.org/articles/internet-sharing-license.en.html">
+http://stallman.org/articles/internet-sharing-license.en.html</a>.</li>
+<li>To design players so users can send authors anonymous voluntary
payments.</li>
+</ul>
+
+<p>E-books need not attack our freedom (Project Gutenberg's e-books
don't),
+but they will if companies get to decide. It's up to us to stop them.</p>
+
+<p>Join the fight: sign up
+at <a href="http://DefectiveByDesign.org/ebooks.html">
+http://DefectiveByDesign.org/ebooks.html</a>.</p>
+
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><!-- 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".
--></strong></del></span>
+
+</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 <span class="removed"><del><strong>FSF.<br />
+Please send broken</strong></del></span> <span class="inserted"><ins><em>FSF.
Broken</em></ins></span> links and other corrections or suggestions <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>can be sent</em></ins></span>
+to <a
href="mailto:address@hidden"><address@hidden></a>.</p>
+
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><p>Please</strong></del></span>
+
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><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">
+ <address@hidden></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</em></ins></span> see the <a
+href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
+README</a> for information on coordinating and submitting translations
+of this article.</p>
+
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><!-- 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. --></em></ins></span>
+
+<p>Copyright © 2011 Richard Stallman</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>
+
+<!--#include virtual="/server/bottom-notes.html" -->
+
+<p>Updated:
+<!-- timestamp start -->
+$Date: 2013/12/13 05:31:28 $
+<!-- timestamp end -->
+</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+</body>
+</html>
+</pre></body></html>
Index: po/why-copyleft.hr-diff.html
===================================================================
RCS file: po/why-copyleft.hr-diff.html
diff -N po/why-copyleft.hr-diff.html
--- /dev/null 1 Jan 1970 00:00:00 -0000
+++ po/why-copyleft.hr-diff.html 13 Dec 2013 05:31:28 -0000 1.1
@@ -0,0 +1,155 @@
+<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
+ "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd";>
+<!-- Generated by GNUN -->
+<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"; xml:lang="en" lang="en">
+<head>
+<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" />
+<title>/philosophy/why-copyleft.html-diff</title>
+<style type="text/css">
+span.removed { background-color: #f22; color: #000; }
+span.inserted { background-color: #2f2; color: #000; }
+</style></head>
+<body><pre>
+<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" -->
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><!-- Parent-Version: 1.75
--></em></ins></span>
+<title>Why Copyleft?
+- GNU Project - Free Software <span class="removed"><del><strong>Foundation
(FSF)</title></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Foundation</title></em></ins></span>
+<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/why-copyleft.translist" -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" -->
+<h2>Why Copyleft?</h2>
+
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><!-- 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. --></strong></del></span>
+
+<p>
+<cite>“When it comes to defending the freedom of others, to lie
+down and do nothing is an act of weakness, not humility.”</cite>
+</p>
+
+<p>
+In the GNU Project we usually recommend people
+use <a href="/copyleft/copyleft.html">copyleft</a> licenses like
GNU
+GPL, rather than permissive non-copyleft free software licenses. We
+don't argue harshly against the non-copyleft licenses—in fact,
+we occasionally recommend them in special circumstances—but the
+advocates of those licenses show a pattern of arguing harshly against
+the <acronym title="General Public License">GPL</acronym>.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+In one such argument, a person stated that his use of one of the BSD
+licenses was an “act of humility”: “I ask nothing of
+those who use my code, except to credit me.” It is rather a
+stretch to describe a legal demand for credit as
+“humility”, but there is a deeper point to be considered
+here.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Humility is abnegating your own self interest, but you and the one who
+uses your code are not the only ones affected by your choice of which
+free software license to use for your code. Someone who uses your
+code in a <span class="removed"><del><strong>non-free</strong></del></span>
<span class="inserted"><ins><em>nonfree</em></ins></span> program is trying to
deny freedom to others, and if
+you let him do it, you're failing to defend their freedom. When it
+comes to defending the freedom of others, to lie down and do nothing
+is an act of weakness, not humility.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Releasing your code under one of the BSD licenses, or some other
+permissive non-copyleft license, is not doing wrong; the program is
+still free software, and still a contribution to our community. But
+it is weak, and in most cases it is not the best way to promote users'
+freedom to share and change software.
+</p>
+
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><!-- 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."
--></strong></del></span>
+
+</div><!-- for id="content", starts in the include above -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
+<div id="footer">
+
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><p>
+Please</strong></del></span>
+
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><p>Please</em></ins></span> send <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>general</em></ins></span> 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.
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><br />
+Please send broken</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Broken</em></ins></span> links and other corrections
or suggestions <span class="inserted"><ins><em>can be sent</em></ins></span>
+to <a <span
class="removed"><del><strong>href="mailto:address@hidden"><address@hidden></a>.
+</p>
+
+<p></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>href="mailto:address@hidden"><address@hidden></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">
+ <address@hidden></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>. --></em></ins></span>
+Please see the <a
+href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
+README</a> for information on coordinating and submitting translations
+of this <span class="removed"><del><strong>article.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Copyright</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>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</em></ins></span> © 2003, 2007, <span
class="removed"><del><strong>2008</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>2008, 2013</em></ins></span> Free Software
Foundation, <span class="removed"><del><strong>Inc.,
+</p>
+<address>51 Franklin St, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110,
USA</address></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Inc.</p></em></ins></span>
+
+<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 <span
class="removed"><del><strong>License</a>.
+</p></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>License</a>.</p></em></ins></span>
+
+<!--#include virtual="/server/bottom-notes.html" -->
+
+<p>Updated:
+<!-- timestamp start -->
+$Date: 2013/12/13 05:31:28 $
+<!-- timestamp end -->
+</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+</body>
+</html>
+</pre></body></html>
Index: po/why-copyleft.ko-diff.html
===================================================================
RCS file: po/why-copyleft.ko-diff.html
diff -N po/why-copyleft.ko-diff.html
--- /dev/null 1 Jan 1970 00:00:00 -0000
+++ po/why-copyleft.ko-diff.html 13 Dec 2013 05:31:28 -0000 1.1
@@ -0,0 +1,155 @@
+<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
+ "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd";>
+<!-- Generated by GNUN -->
+<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"; xml:lang="en" lang="en">
+<head>
+<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" />
+<title>/philosophy/why-copyleft.html-diff</title>
+<style type="text/css">
+span.removed { background-color: #f22; color: #000; }
+span.inserted { background-color: #2f2; color: #000; }
+</style></head>
+<body><pre>
+<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" -->
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><!-- Parent-Version: 1.75
--></em></ins></span>
+<title>Why Copyleft?
+- GNU Project - Free Software <span class="removed"><del><strong>Foundation
(FSF)</title></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Foundation</title></em></ins></span>
+<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/why-copyleft.translist" -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" -->
+<h2>Why Copyleft?</h2>
+
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><!-- 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. --></strong></del></span>
+
+<p>
+<cite>“When it comes to defending the freedom of others, to lie
+down and do nothing is an act of weakness, not humility.”</cite>
+</p>
+
+<p>
+In the GNU Project we usually recommend people
+use <a href="/copyleft/copyleft.html">copyleft</a> licenses like
GNU
+GPL, rather than permissive non-copyleft free software licenses. We
+don't argue harshly against the non-copyleft licenses—in fact,
+we occasionally recommend them in special circumstances—but the
+advocates of those licenses show a pattern of arguing harshly against
+the <acronym title="General Public License">GPL</acronym>.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+In one such argument, a person stated that his use of one of the BSD
+licenses was an “act of humility”: “I ask nothing of
+those who use my code, except to credit me.” It is rather a
+stretch to describe a legal demand for credit as
+“humility”, but there is a deeper point to be considered
+here.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Humility is abnegating your own self interest, but you and the one who
+uses your code are not the only ones affected by your choice of which
+free software license to use for your code. Someone who uses your
+code in a <span class="removed"><del><strong>non-free</strong></del></span>
<span class="inserted"><ins><em>nonfree</em></ins></span> program is trying to
deny freedom to others, and if
+you let him do it, you're failing to defend their freedom. When it
+comes to defending the freedom of others, to lie down and do nothing
+is an act of weakness, not humility.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Releasing your code under one of the BSD licenses, or some other
+permissive non-copyleft license, is not doing wrong; the program is
+still free software, and still a contribution to our community. But
+it is weak, and in most cases it is not the best way to promote users'
+freedom to share and change software.
+</p>
+
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><!-- 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."
--></strong></del></span>
+
+</div><!-- for id="content", starts in the include above -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
+<div id="footer">
+
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><p>
+Please</strong></del></span>
+
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><p>Please</em></ins></span> send <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>general</em></ins></span> 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.
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><br />
+Please send broken</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Broken</em></ins></span> links and other corrections
or suggestions <span class="inserted"><ins><em>can be sent</em></ins></span>
+to <a <span
class="removed"><del><strong>href="mailto:address@hidden"><address@hidden></a>.
+</p>
+
+<p></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>href="mailto:address@hidden"><address@hidden></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">
+ <address@hidden></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>. --></em></ins></span>
+Please see the <a
+href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
+README</a> for information on coordinating and submitting translations
+of this <span class="removed"><del><strong>article.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Copyright</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>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</em></ins></span> © 2003, 2007, <span
class="removed"><del><strong>2008</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>2008, 2013</em></ins></span> Free Software
Foundation, <span class="removed"><del><strong>Inc.,
+</p>
+<address>51 Franklin St, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110,
USA</address></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Inc.</p></em></ins></span>
+
+<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 <span
class="removed"><del><strong>License</a>.
+</p></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>License</a>.</p></em></ins></span>
+
+<!--#include virtual="/server/bottom-notes.html" -->
+
+<p>Updated:
+<!-- timestamp start -->
+$Date: 2013/12/13 05:31:28 $
+<!-- timestamp end -->
+</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+</body>
+</html>
+</pre></body></html>
Index: po/why-copyleft.nl-diff.html
===================================================================
RCS file: po/why-copyleft.nl-diff.html
diff -N po/why-copyleft.nl-diff.html
--- /dev/null 1 Jan 1970 00:00:00 -0000
+++ po/why-copyleft.nl-diff.html 13 Dec 2013 05:31:28 -0000 1.1
@@ -0,0 +1,155 @@
+<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
+ "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd";>
+<!-- Generated by GNUN -->
+<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"; xml:lang="en" lang="en">
+<head>
+<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" />
+<title>/philosophy/why-copyleft.html-diff</title>
+<style type="text/css">
+span.removed { background-color: #f22; color: #000; }
+span.inserted { background-color: #2f2; color: #000; }
+</style></head>
+<body><pre>
+<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" -->
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><!-- Parent-Version: 1.75
--></em></ins></span>
+<title>Why Copyleft?
+- GNU Project - Free Software <span class="removed"><del><strong>Foundation
(FSF)</title></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Foundation</title></em></ins></span>
+<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/why-copyleft.translist" -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" -->
+<h2>Why Copyleft?</h2>
+
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><!-- 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. --></strong></del></span>
+
+<p>
+<cite>“When it comes to defending the freedom of others, to lie
+down and do nothing is an act of weakness, not humility.”</cite>
+</p>
+
+<p>
+In the GNU Project we usually recommend people
+use <a href="/copyleft/copyleft.html">copyleft</a> licenses like
GNU
+GPL, rather than permissive non-copyleft free software licenses. We
+don't argue harshly against the non-copyleft licenses—in fact,
+we occasionally recommend them in special circumstances—but the
+advocates of those licenses show a pattern of arguing harshly against
+the <acronym title="General Public License">GPL</acronym>.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+In one such argument, a person stated that his use of one of the BSD
+licenses was an “act of humility”: “I ask nothing of
+those who use my code, except to credit me.” It is rather a
+stretch to describe a legal demand for credit as
+“humility”, but there is a deeper point to be considered
+here.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Humility is abnegating your own self interest, but you and the one who
+uses your code are not the only ones affected by your choice of which
+free software license to use for your code. Someone who uses your
+code in a <span class="removed"><del><strong>non-free</strong></del></span>
<span class="inserted"><ins><em>nonfree</em></ins></span> program is trying to
deny freedom to others, and if
+you let him do it, you're failing to defend their freedom. When it
+comes to defending the freedom of others, to lie down and do nothing
+is an act of weakness, not humility.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Releasing your code under one of the BSD licenses, or some other
+permissive non-copyleft license, is not doing wrong; the program is
+still free software, and still a contribution to our community. But
+it is weak, and in most cases it is not the best way to promote users'
+freedom to share and change software.
+</p>
+
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><!-- 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."
--></strong></del></span>
+
+</div><!-- for id="content", starts in the include above -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
+<div id="footer">
+
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><p>
+Please</strong></del></span>
+
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><p>Please</em></ins></span> send <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>general</em></ins></span> 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.
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><br />
+Please send broken</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Broken</em></ins></span> links and other corrections
or suggestions <span class="inserted"><ins><em>can be sent</em></ins></span>
+to <a <span
class="removed"><del><strong>href="mailto:address@hidden"><address@hidden></a>.
+</p>
+
+<p></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>href="mailto:address@hidden"><address@hidden></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">
+ <address@hidden></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>. --></em></ins></span>
+Please see the <a
+href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
+README</a> for information on coordinating and submitting translations
+of this <span class="removed"><del><strong>article.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Copyright</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>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</em></ins></span> © 2003, 2007, <span
class="removed"><del><strong>2008</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>2008, 2013</em></ins></span> Free Software
Foundation, <span class="removed"><del><strong>Inc.,
+</p>
+<address>51 Franklin St, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110,
USA</address></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Inc.</p></em></ins></span>
+
+<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 <span
class="removed"><del><strong>License</a>.
+</p></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>License</a>.</p></em></ins></span>
+
+<!--#include virtual="/server/bottom-notes.html" -->
+
+<p>Updated:
+<!-- timestamp start -->
+$Date: 2013/12/13 05:31:28 $
+<!-- timestamp end -->
+</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+</body>
+</html>
+</pre></body></html>
Index: po/why-free.ar-diff.html
===================================================================
RCS file: po/why-free.ar-diff.html
diff -N po/why-free.ar-diff.html
--- /dev/null 1 Jan 1970 00:00:00 -0000
+++ po/why-free.ar-diff.html 13 Dec 2013 05:31:29 -0000 1.1
@@ -0,0 +1,412 @@
+<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
+ "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd";>
+<!-- Generated by GNUN -->
+<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"; xml:lang="en" lang="en">
+<head>
+<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" />
+<title>/philosophy/why-free.html-diff</title>
+<style type="text/css">
+span.removed { background-color: #f22; color: #000; }
+span.inserted { background-color: #2f2; color: #000; }
+</style></head>
+<body><pre>
+<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" -->
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><!-- Parent-Version: 1.75
--></em></ins></span>
+<title>Why Software Should Not Have Owners
+- GNU Project - Free Software <span class="removed"><del><strong>Foundation
(FSF)</title></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Foundation</title></em></ins></span>
+
+<meta name="Keywords" content="GNU, GNU Project, FSF, Free Software, Free
Software Foundation, Why Software Should Not Have Owners" />
+
+<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/why-free.translist" -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" -->
+
+<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>
+
+<span
class="removed"><del><strong><h4>Footnotes</h4></strong></del></span>
+
+<span
class="inserted"><ins><em><h3>Footnotes</h3></em></ins></span>
+<ol>
+<li id="footnote1">The charges were subsequently dismissed.</li>
+</ol>
+
+<hr />
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><h4>This</strong></del></span>
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><p>This</em></ins></span> 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. <span
class="removed"><del><strong>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</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Stallman</cite></a>.</p>
+
+</div><!-- for id="content", starts in</em></ins></span> the <span
class="removed"><del><strong>document -->
+<!-- and that it is like this "2001, 2002" not this
"2001-2002."</strong></del></span> <span class="inserted"><ins><em>include
above</em></ins></span> -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
+<div id="footer">
+
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><p>
+Please</strong></del></span>
+
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><p>Please</em></ins></span> send <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>general</em></ins></span> 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.
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><br />
+Please send broken</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Broken</em></ins></span> links and other corrections
or suggestions <span class="inserted"><ins><em>can be sent</em></ins></span>
+to <a <span
class="removed"><del><strong>href="mailto:address@hidden"><address@hidden></a>.
+</p>
+
+<p></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>href="mailto:address@hidden"><address@hidden></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">
+ <address@hidden></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>. --></em></ins></span>
+Please see the <a
+href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
+README</a> for information on coordinating and submitting translations
+of this <span class="removed"><del><strong>article.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Copyright</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>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</em></ins></span> © 1994, 2009 Richard <span
class="removed"><del><strong>Stallman
+<br />
+This</strong></del></span> <span class="inserted"><ins><em>Stallman</p>
+
+<p>This</em></ins></span> 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 <span
class="removed"><del><strong>License</a>.
+</p></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>License</a>.</p></em></ins></span>
+
+<!--#include virtual="/server/bottom-notes.html" -->
+
+<p>Updated:
+<!-- timestamp start -->
+$Date: 2013/12/13 05:31:29 $
+<!-- timestamp end -->
+</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+</body>
+</html>
+</pre></body></html>
Index: po/why-free.hr-diff.html
===================================================================
RCS file: po/why-free.hr-diff.html
diff -N po/why-free.hr-diff.html
--- /dev/null 1 Jan 1970 00:00:00 -0000
+++ po/why-free.hr-diff.html 13 Dec 2013 05:31:29 -0000 1.1
@@ -0,0 +1,412 @@
+<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
+ "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd";>
+<!-- Generated by GNUN -->
+<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"; xml:lang="en" lang="en">
+<head>
+<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" />
+<title>/philosophy/why-free.html-diff</title>
+<style type="text/css">
+span.removed { background-color: #f22; color: #000; }
+span.inserted { background-color: #2f2; color: #000; }
+</style></head>
+<body><pre>
+<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" -->
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><!-- Parent-Version: 1.75
--></em></ins></span>
+<title>Why Software Should Not Have Owners
+- GNU Project - Free Software <span class="removed"><del><strong>Foundation
(FSF)</title></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Foundation</title></em></ins></span>
+
+<meta name="Keywords" content="GNU, GNU Project, FSF, Free Software, Free
Software Foundation, Why Software Should Not Have Owners" />
+
+<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/why-free.translist" -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" -->
+
+<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>
+
+<span
class="removed"><del><strong><h4>Footnotes</h4></strong></del></span>
+
+<span
class="inserted"><ins><em><h3>Footnotes</h3></em></ins></span>
+<ol>
+<li id="footnote1">The charges were subsequently dismissed.</li>
+</ol>
+
+<hr />
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><h4>This</strong></del></span>
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><p>This</em></ins></span> 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. <span
class="removed"><del><strong>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</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Stallman</cite></a>.</p>
+
+</div><!-- for id="content", starts in</em></ins></span> the <span
class="removed"><del><strong>document -->
+<!-- and that it is like this "2001, 2002" not this
"2001-2002."</strong></del></span> <span class="inserted"><ins><em>include
above</em></ins></span> -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
+<div id="footer">
+
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><p>
+Please</strong></del></span>
+
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><p>Please</em></ins></span> send <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>general</em></ins></span> 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.
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><br />
+Please send broken</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Broken</em></ins></span> links and other corrections
or suggestions <span class="inserted"><ins><em>can be sent</em></ins></span>
+to <a <span
class="removed"><del><strong>href="mailto:address@hidden"><address@hidden></a>.
+</p>
+
+<p></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>href="mailto:address@hidden"><address@hidden></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">
+ <address@hidden></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>. --></em></ins></span>
+Please see the <a
+href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
+README</a> for information on coordinating and submitting translations
+of this <span class="removed"><del><strong>article.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Copyright</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>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</em></ins></span> © 1994, 2009 Richard <span
class="removed"><del><strong>Stallman
+<br />
+This</strong></del></span> <span class="inserted"><ins><em>Stallman</p>
+
+<p>This</em></ins></span> 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 <span
class="removed"><del><strong>License</a>.
+</p></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>License</a>.</p></em></ins></span>
+
+<!--#include virtual="/server/bottom-notes.html" -->
+
+<p>Updated:
+<!-- timestamp start -->
+$Date: 2013/12/13 05:31:29 $
+<!-- timestamp end -->
+</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+</body>
+</html>
+</pre></body></html>
Index: po/why-free.ko-diff.html
===================================================================
RCS file: po/why-free.ko-diff.html
diff -N po/why-free.ko-diff.html
--- /dev/null 1 Jan 1970 00:00:00 -0000
+++ po/why-free.ko-diff.html 13 Dec 2013 05:31:29 -0000 1.1
@@ -0,0 +1,412 @@
+<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
+ "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd";>
+<!-- Generated by GNUN -->
+<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"; xml:lang="en" lang="en">
+<head>
+<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" />
+<title>/philosophy/why-free.html-diff</title>
+<style type="text/css">
+span.removed { background-color: #f22; color: #000; }
+span.inserted { background-color: #2f2; color: #000; }
+</style></head>
+<body><pre>
+<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" -->
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><!-- Parent-Version: 1.75
--></em></ins></span>
+<title>Why Software Should Not Have Owners
+- GNU Project - Free Software <span class="removed"><del><strong>Foundation
(FSF)</title></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Foundation</title></em></ins></span>
+
+<meta name="Keywords" content="GNU, GNU Project, FSF, Free Software, Free
Software Foundation, Why Software Should Not Have Owners" />
+
+<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/why-free.translist" -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" -->
+
+<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>
+
+<span
class="removed"><del><strong><h4>Footnotes</h4></strong></del></span>
+
+<span
class="inserted"><ins><em><h3>Footnotes</h3></em></ins></span>
+<ol>
+<li id="footnote1">The charges were subsequently dismissed.</li>
+</ol>
+
+<hr />
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><h4>This</strong></del></span>
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><p>This</em></ins></span> 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. <span
class="removed"><del><strong>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</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Stallman</cite></a>.</p>
+
+</div><!-- for id="content", starts in</em></ins></span> the <span
class="removed"><del><strong>document -->
+<!-- and that it is like this "2001, 2002" not this
"2001-2002."</strong></del></span> <span class="inserted"><ins><em>include
above</em></ins></span> -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
+<div id="footer">
+
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><p>
+Please</strong></del></span>
+
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><p>Please</em></ins></span> send <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>general</em></ins></span> 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.
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><br />
+Please send broken</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Broken</em></ins></span> links and other corrections
or suggestions <span class="inserted"><ins><em>can be sent</em></ins></span>
+to <a <span
class="removed"><del><strong>href="mailto:address@hidden"><address@hidden></a>.
+</p>
+
+<p></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>href="mailto:address@hidden"><address@hidden></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">
+ <address@hidden></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>. --></em></ins></span>
+Please see the <a
+href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
+README</a> for information on coordinating and submitting translations
+of this <span class="removed"><del><strong>article.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Copyright</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>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</em></ins></span> © 1994, 2009 Richard <span
class="removed"><del><strong>Stallman
+<br />
+This</strong></del></span> <span class="inserted"><ins><em>Stallman</p>
+
+<p>This</em></ins></span> 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 <span
class="removed"><del><strong>License</a>.
+</p></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>License</a>.</p></em></ins></span>
+
+<!--#include virtual="/server/bottom-notes.html" -->
+
+<p>Updated:
+<!-- timestamp start -->
+$Date: 2013/12/13 05:31:29 $
+<!-- timestamp end -->
+</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+</body>
+</html>
+</pre></body></html>
Index: po/why-free.nl-diff.html
===================================================================
RCS file: po/why-free.nl-diff.html
diff -N po/why-free.nl-diff.html
--- /dev/null 1 Jan 1970 00:00:00 -0000
+++ po/why-free.nl-diff.html 13 Dec 2013 05:31:29 -0000 1.1
@@ -0,0 +1,412 @@
+<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
+ "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd";>
+<!-- Generated by GNUN -->
+<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"; xml:lang="en" lang="en">
+<head>
+<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" />
+<title>/philosophy/why-free.html-diff</title>
+<style type="text/css">
+span.removed { background-color: #f22; color: #000; }
+span.inserted { background-color: #2f2; color: #000; }
+</style></head>
+<body><pre>
+<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" -->
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><!-- Parent-Version: 1.75
--></em></ins></span>
+<title>Why Software Should Not Have Owners
+- GNU Project - Free Software <span class="removed"><del><strong>Foundation
(FSF)</title></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Foundation</title></em></ins></span>
+
+<meta name="Keywords" content="GNU, GNU Project, FSF, Free Software, Free
Software Foundation, Why Software Should Not Have Owners" />
+
+<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/why-free.translist" -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" -->
+
+<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>
+
+<span
class="removed"><del><strong><h4>Footnotes</h4></strong></del></span>
+
+<span
class="inserted"><ins><em><h3>Footnotes</h3></em></ins></span>
+<ol>
+<li id="footnote1">The charges were subsequently dismissed.</li>
+</ol>
+
+<hr />
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><h4>This</strong></del></span>
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><p>This</em></ins></span> 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. <span
class="removed"><del><strong>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</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Stallman</cite></a>.</p>
+
+</div><!-- for id="content", starts in</em></ins></span> the <span
class="removed"><del><strong>document -->
+<!-- and that it is like this "2001, 2002" not this
"2001-2002."</strong></del></span> <span class="inserted"><ins><em>include
above</em></ins></span> -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
+<div id="footer">
+
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><p>
+Please</strong></del></span>
+
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><p>Please</em></ins></span> send <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>general</em></ins></span> 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.
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><br />
+Please send broken</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Broken</em></ins></span> links and other corrections
or suggestions <span class="inserted"><ins><em>can be sent</em></ins></span>
+to <a <span
class="removed"><del><strong>href="mailto:address@hidden"><address@hidden></a>.
+</p>
+
+<p></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>href="mailto:address@hidden"><address@hidden></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">
+ <address@hidden></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>. --></em></ins></span>
+Please see the <a
+href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
+README</a> for information on coordinating and submitting translations
+of this <span class="removed"><del><strong>article.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Copyright</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>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</em></ins></span> © 1994, 2009 Richard <span
class="removed"><del><strong>Stallman
+<br />
+This</strong></del></span> <span class="inserted"><ins><em>Stallman</p>
+
+<p>This</em></ins></span> 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 <span
class="removed"><del><strong>License</a>.
+</p></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>License</a>.</p></em></ins></span>
+
+<!--#include virtual="/server/bottom-notes.html" -->
+
+<p>Updated:
+<!-- timestamp start -->
+$Date: 2013/12/13 05:31:29 $
+<!-- timestamp end -->
+</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+</body>
+</html>
+</pre></body></html>
Index: po/why-free.pt-br-diff.html
===================================================================
RCS file: po/why-free.pt-br-diff.html
diff -N po/why-free.pt-br-diff.html
--- /dev/null 1 Jan 1970 00:00:00 -0000
+++ po/why-free.pt-br-diff.html 13 Dec 2013 05:31:29 -0000 1.1
@@ -0,0 +1,412 @@
+<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
+ "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd";>
+<!-- Generated by GNUN -->
+<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"; xml:lang="en" lang="en">
+<head>
+<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" />
+<title>/philosophy/why-free.html-diff</title>
+<style type="text/css">
+span.removed { background-color: #f22; color: #000; }
+span.inserted { background-color: #2f2; color: #000; }
+</style></head>
+<body><pre>
+<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" -->
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><!-- Parent-Version: 1.75
--></em></ins></span>
+<title>Why Software Should Not Have Owners
+- GNU Project - Free Software <span class="removed"><del><strong>Foundation
(FSF)</title></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Foundation</title></em></ins></span>
+
+<meta name="Keywords" content="GNU, GNU Project, FSF, Free Software, Free
Software Foundation, Why Software Should Not Have Owners" />
+
+<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/why-free.translist" -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" -->
+
+<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>
+
+<span
class="removed"><del><strong><h4>Footnotes</h4></strong></del></span>
+
+<span
class="inserted"><ins><em><h3>Footnotes</h3></em></ins></span>
+<ol>
+<li id="footnote1">The charges were subsequently dismissed.</li>
+</ol>
+
+<hr />
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><h4>This</strong></del></span>
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><p>This</em></ins></span> 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. <span
class="removed"><del><strong>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</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Stallman</cite></a>.</p>
+
+</div><!-- for id="content", starts in</em></ins></span> the <span
class="removed"><del><strong>document -->
+<!-- and that it is like this "2001, 2002" not this
"2001-2002."</strong></del></span> <span class="inserted"><ins><em>include
above</em></ins></span> -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
+<div id="footer">
+
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><p>
+Please</strong></del></span>
+
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><p>Please</em></ins></span> send <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>general</em></ins></span> 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.
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><br />
+Please send broken</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Broken</em></ins></span> links and other corrections
or suggestions <span class="inserted"><ins><em>can be sent</em></ins></span>
+to <a <span
class="removed"><del><strong>href="mailto:address@hidden"><address@hidden></a>.
+</p>
+
+<p></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>href="mailto:address@hidden"><address@hidden></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">
+ <address@hidden></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>. --></em></ins></span>
+Please see the <a
+href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
+README</a> for information on coordinating and submitting translations
+of this <span class="removed"><del><strong>article.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Copyright</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>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</em></ins></span> © 1994, 2009 Richard <span
class="removed"><del><strong>Stallman
+<br />
+This</strong></del></span> <span class="inserted"><ins><em>Stallman</p>
+
+<p>This</em></ins></span> 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 <span
class="removed"><del><strong>License</a>.
+</p></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>License</a>.</p></em></ins></span>
+
+<!--#include virtual="/server/bottom-notes.html" -->
+
+<p>Updated:
+<!-- timestamp start -->
+$Date: 2013/12/13 05:31:29 $
+<!-- timestamp end -->
+</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+</body>
+</html>
+</pre></body></html>
Index: po/why-free.zh-tw-diff.html
===================================================================
RCS file: po/why-free.zh-tw-diff.html
diff -N po/why-free.zh-tw-diff.html
--- /dev/null 1 Jan 1970 00:00:00 -0000
+++ po/why-free.zh-tw-diff.html 13 Dec 2013 05:31:29 -0000 1.1
@@ -0,0 +1,412 @@
+<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
+ "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd";>
+<!-- Generated by GNUN -->
+<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"; xml:lang="en" lang="en">
+<head>
+<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" />
+<title>/philosophy/why-free.html-diff</title>
+<style type="text/css">
+span.removed { background-color: #f22; color: #000; }
+span.inserted { background-color: #2f2; color: #000; }
+</style></head>
+<body><pre>
+<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" -->
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><!-- Parent-Version: 1.75
--></em></ins></span>
+<title>Why Software Should Not Have Owners
+- GNU Project - Free Software <span class="removed"><del><strong>Foundation
(FSF)</title></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Foundation</title></em></ins></span>
+
+<meta name="Keywords" content="GNU, GNU Project, FSF, Free Software, Free
Software Foundation, Why Software Should Not Have Owners" />
+
+<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/why-free.translist" -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" -->
+
+<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>
+
+<span
class="removed"><del><strong><h4>Footnotes</h4></strong></del></span>
+
+<span
class="inserted"><ins><em><h3>Footnotes</h3></em></ins></span>
+<ol>
+<li id="footnote1">The charges were subsequently dismissed.</li>
+</ol>
+
+<hr />
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><h4>This</strong></del></span>
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><p>This</em></ins></span> 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. <span
class="removed"><del><strong>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</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Stallman</cite></a>.</p>
+
+</div><!-- for id="content", starts in</em></ins></span> the <span
class="removed"><del><strong>document -->
+<!-- and that it is like this "2001, 2002" not this
"2001-2002."</strong></del></span> <span class="inserted"><ins><em>include
above</em></ins></span> -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
+<div id="footer">
+
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><p>
+Please</strong></del></span>
+
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><p>Please</em></ins></span> send <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>general</em></ins></span> 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.
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><br />
+Please send broken</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Broken</em></ins></span> links and other corrections
or suggestions <span class="inserted"><ins><em>can be sent</em></ins></span>
+to <a <span
class="removed"><del><strong>href="mailto:address@hidden"><address@hidden></a>.
+</p>
+
+<p></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>href="mailto:address@hidden"><address@hidden></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">
+ <address@hidden></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>. --></em></ins></span>
+Please see the <a
+href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
+README</a> for information on coordinating and submitting translations
+of this <span class="removed"><del><strong>article.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Copyright</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>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</em></ins></span> © 1994, 2009 Richard <span
class="removed"><del><strong>Stallman
+<br />
+This</strong></del></span> <span class="inserted"><ins><em>Stallman</p>
+
+<p>This</em></ins></span> 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 <span
class="removed"><del><strong>License</a>.
+</p></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>License</a>.</p></em></ins></span>
+
+<!--#include virtual="/server/bottom-notes.html" -->
+
+<p>Updated:
+<!-- timestamp start -->
+$Date: 2013/12/13 05:31:29 $
+<!-- timestamp end -->
+</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+</body>
+</html>
+</pre></body></html>
Index: po/x.ko-diff.html
===================================================================
RCS file: po/x.ko-diff.html
diff -N po/x.ko-diff.html
--- /dev/null 1 Jan 1970 00:00:00 -0000
+++ po/x.ko-diff.html 13 Dec 2013 05:31:29 -0000 1.1
@@ -0,0 +1,247 @@
+<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
+ "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd";>
+<!-- Generated by GNUN -->
+<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"; xml:lang="en" lang="en">
+<head>
+<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" />
+<title>/philosophy/x.html-diff</title>
+<style type="text/css">
+span.removed { background-color: #f22; color: #000; }
+span.inserted { background-color: #2f2; color: #000; }
+</style></head>
+<body><pre>
+<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" -->
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><!-- Parent-Version: 1.75
--></em></ins></span>
+<title>The X Window System Trap
+- GNU Project - Free Software <span class="removed"><del><strong>Foundation
(FSF)</title></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Foundation</title></em></ins></span>
+<meta http-equiv="Keywords"
+ content="GNU, FSF, Free Software Foundation, freedom, Richard Stallman,
rms, free software movement" />
+<meta http-equiv="Description"
+ content="Richard Stallman discusses the history of the movement to
develop a free operating system." />
+
+<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/x.translist" -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" -->
+
+<h2>The X Window System Trap</h2>
+
+<p>
+ by <strong>Richard M. Stallman</strong>
+</p>
+
+<p>
+To copyleft or not to copyleft? That is one of the major
+controversies in the free software community. The idea of copyleft is
+that we should fight fire with fire—that we should use copyright
+to make sure our code stays free. The GNU General Public License (GNU
+GPL) is one example of a copyleft license.</p>
+
+<p>
+Some free software developers prefer noncopyleft distribution.
+Noncopyleft licenses such as the XFree86 and
+<a href="/philosophy/bsd.html">BSD</a> licenses are based on the
idea
+of never saying no to anyone—not even to someone who seeks to
+use your work as the basis for restricting other people. Noncopyleft
+licensing does nothing wrong, but it misses the opportunity to
+actively protect our freedom to change and redistribute software. For
+that, we need copyleft.</p>
+
+<p>
+For many years, the X Consortium was the chief opponent of copyleft.
+It exerted both moral suasion and pressure to discourage free software
+developers from copylefting their programs. It used moral suasion by
+suggesting that it is not nice to say no. It used pressure through
+its rule that copylefted software could not be in the X Distribution.</p>
+
+<p>
+Why did the X Consortium adopt this policy? It had to do with their
+conception of success. The X Consortium defined success as
+popularity—specifically, getting computer companies to use the X
+Window System. This definition put the computer companies in the
+driver's seat: whatever they wanted, the X Consortium had to help
+them get it.</p>
+
+<p>
+Computer companies normally distribute proprietary software. They
+wanted free software developers to donate their work for such use. If
+they had asked for this directly, people would have laughed. But the
+X Consortium, fronting for them, could present this request as an
+unselfish one. “Join us in donating our work to proprietary software
+developers,” they said, suggesting that this is a noble form of
+self-sacrifice. “Join us in achieving popularity,” they said,
+suggesting that it was not even a sacrifice.</p>
+
+<p>
+But self-sacrifice is not the issue: tossing away the defense that
+copyleft provides, which protects the freedom of the whole community,
+is sacrificing more than yourself. Those who granted the X
+Consortium's request entrusted the community's future to the goodwill
+of the X Consortium.</p>
+
+<p>
+This trust was misplaced. In its last year, the X Consortium made a
+plan to restrict the forthcoming X11R6.4 release so that it would not
+be free software. They decided to start saying no, not only to
+proprietary software developers, but to our community as well.</p>
+
+<p>
+There is an irony here. If you said yes when the X Consortium asked
+you not to use copyleft, you put the X Consortium in a position to
+license and restrict its version of your program, along with the
+code for the core of X.</p>
+
+<p>
+The X Consortium did not carry out this plan. Instead it closed down
+and transferred X development to the Open Group, whose staff are now
+carrying out a similar plan. To give them credit, when I asked them
+to release X11R6.4 under the GNU GPL in parallel with their planned
+restrictive license, they were willing to consider the idea. (They
+were firmly against staying with the old X11 distribution terms.)
+Before they said yes or no to this proposal, it had already failed for
+another reason: the XFree86 group followed the X Consortium's old
+policy, and will not accept copylefted software.
+</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. Thus, the Open Group therefore eventually did
+what was right, but that does not alter the general issue.</p>
+
+<p>
+Even if the X Consortium and the Open Group had never planned to
+restrict X, someone else could have done it. Noncopylefted software
+is vulnerable from all directions; it lets anyone make a nonfree
+version dominant, if he will invest sufficient resources to add
+significantly important features using proprietary code. Users who
+choose software based on technical characteristics, rather than on
+freedom, could easily be lured to the nonfree version for short-term
+convenience.</p>
+
+<p>
+The X Consortium and Open Group can no longer exert moral suasion by
+saying that it is wrong to say no. This will make it easier to decide
+to copyleft your X-related software.</p>
+
+<p>
+When you work on the core of X, on programs such as the X server,
+Xlib, and Xt, there is a practical reason not to use copyleft. The
+X.org group does an important job for the community in maintaining
+these programs, and the benefit of copylefting our changes would be
+less than the harm done by a fork in development. So it is better to
+work with them, and not copyleft our changes on these programs.
+Likewise for utilities such as <tt>xset</tt> and
<tt>xrdb</tt>, which are close to the
+core of X and do not need major improvements. At least we know that
+the X.org group has a firm commitment to developing these programs as
+free software.</p>
+
+<p>
+The issue is different for programs outside the core of X:
+applications, window managers, and additional libraries and widgets.
+There is no reason not to copyleft them, and we should copyleft them.</p>
+
+<p>
+In case anyone feels the pressure exerted by the criteria for
+inclusion in the X distributions, the GNU Project will undertake to
+publicize copylefted packages that work with X. If you would like to
+copyleft something, and you worry that its omission from the X
+distribution will impede its popularity, please ask us to help.</p>
+
+<p>
+At the same time, it is better if we do not feel too much need for
+popularity. When a businessman tempts you with “more
+popularity,” he may try to convince you that his use of your
+program is crucial to its success. Don't believe it! If your program
+is good, it will find many users anyway; you don't need to feel
+desperate for any particular users, and you will be stronger if you do
+not. You can get an indescribable sense of joy and freedom by
+responding, “Take it or leave it—that's no skin off my
+back.” Often the businessman will turn around and accept the
+program with copyleft, once you call the bluff.</p>
+
+<p>
+Friends, free software developers, don't repeat old mistakes! If we
+do not copyleft our software, we put its future at the mercy of anyone
+equipped with more resources than scruples. With copyleft, we can
+defend freedom, not just for ourselves, but for our whole
+community.</p>
+
+<span class="removed"><del><strong></div></strong></del></span>
+
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em></div><!-- for id="content", starts
in the include above --></em></ins></span>
+<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
+<div id="footer">
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><p>
+Please</strong></del></span>
+
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><p>Please</em></ins></span> send <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>general</em></ins></span> FSF & GNU inquiries to
+<a <span
class="removed"><del><strong>href="mailto:address@hidden"><em>address@hidden</em></a>.</strong></del></span>
<span
class="inserted"><ins><em>href="mailto:address@hidden"><address@hidden></a>.</em></ins></span>
+There are also <a href="/contact/">other ways to contact</a>
+the FSF.
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><br />
+Please send broken</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Broken</em></ins></span> links and other corrections
or suggestions <span class="inserted"><ins><em>can be sent</em></ins></span>
+to <a <span
class="removed"><del><strong>href="mailto:address@hidden"><em>address@hidden</em></a>.
+</p>
+
+<p></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>href="mailto:address@hidden"><address@hidden></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">
+ <address@hidden></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>. --></em></ins></span>
+Please see the <a
+href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
+README</a> for information on coordinating and submitting translations
+of this <span class="removed"><del><strong>article.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Copyright</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>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</em></ins></span> © 1998, 1999, 2009 Richard M. <span
class="removed"><del><strong>Stallman
+<br />
+This</strong></del></span> <span class="inserted"><ins><em>Stallman</p>
+
+<p>This</em></ins></span> 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 <span
class="removed"><del><strong>License</a>.
+</p></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>License</a>.</p></em></ins></span>
+
+<!--#include virtual="/server/bottom-notes.html" -->
+
+<p>Updated:
+<!-- timestamp start -->
+$Date: 2013/12/13 05:31:29 $
+<!-- timestamp end -->
+</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+</body>
+</html>
+</pre></body></html>
Index: po/x.nl-diff.html
===================================================================
RCS file: po/x.nl-diff.html
diff -N po/x.nl-diff.html
--- /dev/null 1 Jan 1970 00:00:00 -0000
+++ po/x.nl-diff.html 13 Dec 2013 05:31:29 -0000 1.1
@@ -0,0 +1,247 @@
+<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
+ "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd";>
+<!-- Generated by GNUN -->
+<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"; xml:lang="en" lang="en">
+<head>
+<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" />
+<title>/philosophy/x.html-diff</title>
+<style type="text/css">
+span.removed { background-color: #f22; color: #000; }
+span.inserted { background-color: #2f2; color: #000; }
+</style></head>
+<body><pre>
+<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" -->
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><!-- Parent-Version: 1.75
--></em></ins></span>
+<title>The X Window System Trap
+- GNU Project - Free Software <span class="removed"><del><strong>Foundation
(FSF)</title></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Foundation</title></em></ins></span>
+<meta http-equiv="Keywords"
+ content="GNU, FSF, Free Software Foundation, freedom, Richard Stallman,
rms, free software movement" />
+<meta http-equiv="Description"
+ content="Richard Stallman discusses the history of the movement to
develop a free operating system." />
+
+<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/x.translist" -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" -->
+
+<h2>The X Window System Trap</h2>
+
+<p>
+ by <strong>Richard M. Stallman</strong>
+</p>
+
+<p>
+To copyleft or not to copyleft? That is one of the major
+controversies in the free software community. The idea of copyleft is
+that we should fight fire with fire—that we should use copyright
+to make sure our code stays free. The GNU General Public License (GNU
+GPL) is one example of a copyleft license.</p>
+
+<p>
+Some free software developers prefer noncopyleft distribution.
+Noncopyleft licenses such as the XFree86 and
+<a href="/philosophy/bsd.html">BSD</a> licenses are based on the
idea
+of never saying no to anyone—not even to someone who seeks to
+use your work as the basis for restricting other people. Noncopyleft
+licensing does nothing wrong, but it misses the opportunity to
+actively protect our freedom to change and redistribute software. For
+that, we need copyleft.</p>
+
+<p>
+For many years, the X Consortium was the chief opponent of copyleft.
+It exerted both moral suasion and pressure to discourage free software
+developers from copylefting their programs. It used moral suasion by
+suggesting that it is not nice to say no. It used pressure through
+its rule that copylefted software could not be in the X Distribution.</p>
+
+<p>
+Why did the X Consortium adopt this policy? It had to do with their
+conception of success. The X Consortium defined success as
+popularity—specifically, getting computer companies to use the X
+Window System. This definition put the computer companies in the
+driver's seat: whatever they wanted, the X Consortium had to help
+them get it.</p>
+
+<p>
+Computer companies normally distribute proprietary software. They
+wanted free software developers to donate their work for such use. If
+they had asked for this directly, people would have laughed. But the
+X Consortium, fronting for them, could present this request as an
+unselfish one. “Join us in donating our work to proprietary software
+developers,” they said, suggesting that this is a noble form of
+self-sacrifice. “Join us in achieving popularity,” they said,
+suggesting that it was not even a sacrifice.</p>
+
+<p>
+But self-sacrifice is not the issue: tossing away the defense that
+copyleft provides, which protects the freedom of the whole community,
+is sacrificing more than yourself. Those who granted the X
+Consortium's request entrusted the community's future to the goodwill
+of the X Consortium.</p>
+
+<p>
+This trust was misplaced. In its last year, the X Consortium made a
+plan to restrict the forthcoming X11R6.4 release so that it would not
+be free software. They decided to start saying no, not only to
+proprietary software developers, but to our community as well.</p>
+
+<p>
+There is an irony here. If you said yes when the X Consortium asked
+you not to use copyleft, you put the X Consortium in a position to
+license and restrict its version of your program, along with the
+code for the core of X.</p>
+
+<p>
+The X Consortium did not carry out this plan. Instead it closed down
+and transferred X development to the Open Group, whose staff are now
+carrying out a similar plan. To give them credit, when I asked them
+to release X11R6.4 under the GNU GPL in parallel with their planned
+restrictive license, they were willing to consider the idea. (They
+were firmly against staying with the old X11 distribution terms.)
+Before they said yes or no to this proposal, it had already failed for
+another reason: the XFree86 group followed the X Consortium's old
+policy, and will not accept copylefted software.
+</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. Thus, the Open Group therefore eventually did
+what was right, but that does not alter the general issue.</p>
+
+<p>
+Even if the X Consortium and the Open Group had never planned to
+restrict X, someone else could have done it. Noncopylefted software
+is vulnerable from all directions; it lets anyone make a nonfree
+version dominant, if he will invest sufficient resources to add
+significantly important features using proprietary code. Users who
+choose software based on technical characteristics, rather than on
+freedom, could easily be lured to the nonfree version for short-term
+convenience.</p>
+
+<p>
+The X Consortium and Open Group can no longer exert moral suasion by
+saying that it is wrong to say no. This will make it easier to decide
+to copyleft your X-related software.</p>
+
+<p>
+When you work on the core of X, on programs such as the X server,
+Xlib, and Xt, there is a practical reason not to use copyleft. The
+X.org group does an important job for the community in maintaining
+these programs, and the benefit of copylefting our changes would be
+less than the harm done by a fork in development. So it is better to
+work with them, and not copyleft our changes on these programs.
+Likewise for utilities such as <tt>xset</tt> and
<tt>xrdb</tt>, which are close to the
+core of X and do not need major improvements. At least we know that
+the X.org group has a firm commitment to developing these programs as
+free software.</p>
+
+<p>
+The issue is different for programs outside the core of X:
+applications, window managers, and additional libraries and widgets.
+There is no reason not to copyleft them, and we should copyleft them.</p>
+
+<p>
+In case anyone feels the pressure exerted by the criteria for
+inclusion in the X distributions, the GNU Project will undertake to
+publicize copylefted packages that work with X. If you would like to
+copyleft something, and you worry that its omission from the X
+distribution will impede its popularity, please ask us to help.</p>
+
+<p>
+At the same time, it is better if we do not feel too much need for
+popularity. When a businessman tempts you with “more
+popularity,” he may try to convince you that his use of your
+program is crucial to its success. Don't believe it! If your program
+is good, it will find many users anyway; you don't need to feel
+desperate for any particular users, and you will be stronger if you do
+not. You can get an indescribable sense of joy and freedom by
+responding, “Take it or leave it—that's no skin off my
+back.” Often the businessman will turn around and accept the
+program with copyleft, once you call the bluff.</p>
+
+<p>
+Friends, free software developers, don't repeat old mistakes! If we
+do not copyleft our software, we put its future at the mercy of anyone
+equipped with more resources than scruples. With copyleft, we can
+defend freedom, not just for ourselves, but for our whole
+community.</p>
+
+<span class="removed"><del><strong></div></strong></del></span>
+
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em></div><!-- for id="content", starts
in the include above --></em></ins></span>
+<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
+<div id="footer">
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><p>
+Please</strong></del></span>
+
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><p>Please</em></ins></span> send <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>general</em></ins></span> FSF & GNU inquiries to
+<a <span
class="removed"><del><strong>href="mailto:address@hidden"><em>address@hidden</em></a>.</strong></del></span>
<span
class="inserted"><ins><em>href="mailto:address@hidden"><address@hidden></a>.</em></ins></span>
+There are also <a href="/contact/">other ways to contact</a>
+the FSF.
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><br />
+Please send broken</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Broken</em></ins></span> links and other corrections
or suggestions <span class="inserted"><ins><em>can be sent</em></ins></span>
+to <a <span
class="removed"><del><strong>href="mailto:address@hidden"><em>address@hidden</em></a>.
+</p>
+
+<p></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>href="mailto:address@hidden"><address@hidden></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">
+ <address@hidden></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>. --></em></ins></span>
+Please see the <a
+href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
+README</a> for information on coordinating and submitting translations
+of this <span class="removed"><del><strong>article.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Copyright</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>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</em></ins></span> © 1998, 1999, 2009 Richard M. <span
class="removed"><del><strong>Stallman
+<br />
+This</strong></del></span> <span class="inserted"><ins><em>Stallman</p>
+
+<p>This</em></ins></span> 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 <span
class="removed"><del><strong>License</a>.
+</p></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>License</a>.</p></em></ins></span>
+
+<!--#include virtual="/server/bottom-notes.html" -->
+
+<p>Updated:
+<!-- timestamp start -->
+$Date: 2013/12/13 05:31:29 $
+<!-- timestamp end -->
+</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+</body>
+</html>
+</pre></body></html>
| [Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread] |
- www/philosophy ipjustice.nl.html netscape-npl.n...,
GNUN <=