www-commits
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

www/philosophy gpl-american-dream.html gpl-amer...


From: Therese Godefroy
Subject: www/philosophy gpl-american-dream.html gpl-amer...
Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2021 04:14:20 -0400 (EDT)

CVSROOT:        /webcvs/www
Module name:    www
Changes by:     Therese Godefroy <th_g> 21/09/12 04:14:20

Modified files:
        philosophy     : gpl-american-dream.html gpl-american-way.html 
                         imperfection-isnt-oppression.html 
                         lessig-fsfs-intro.html 
                         lest-codeplex-perplex.html 
                         linux-gnu-freedom.html microsoft-old.html 
                         misinterpreting-copyright.html my_doom.html 
                         open-source-misses-the-point.html 
                         shouldbefree.html words-to-avoid.html 

Log message:
        Changes that shouldn't affect translations: non-free > nonfree, quotes,
        dashes, copyright comment, etc.

CVSWeb URLs:
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/gpl-american-dream.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.31&r2=1.32
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/gpl-american-way.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.34&r2=1.35
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/imperfection-isnt-oppression.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.10&r2=1.11
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/lessig-fsfs-intro.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.39&r2=1.40
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/lest-codeplex-perplex.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.20&r2=1.21
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/linux-gnu-freedom.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.51&r2=1.52
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/microsoft-old.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.20&r2=1.21
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/misinterpreting-copyright.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.62&r2=1.63
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/my_doom.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.35&r2=1.36
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.100&r2=1.101
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/shouldbefree.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.73&r2=1.74
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.271&r2=1.272

Patches:
Index: gpl-american-dream.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /webcvs/www/www/philosophy/gpl-american-dream.html,v
retrieving revision 1.31
retrieving revision 1.32
diff -u -b -r1.31 -r1.32
--- gpl-american-dream.html     19 Aug 2021 07:36:45 -0000      1.31
+++ gpl-american-dream.html     12 Sep 2021 08:14:17 -0000      1.32
@@ -10,19 +10,18 @@
 <!--#include virtual="/philosophy/ph-breadcrumb.html" -->
 <!--GNUN: OUT-OF-DATE NOTICE-->
 <!--#include virtual="/server/top-addendum.html" -->
-<div class="reduced-width">
+<div class="article reduced-width">
 <h2>The GNU GPL and the American Dream</h2>
 
 <address class="byline">by Bradley M. Kuhn</address>
 
-<div class="article">
 <p>
 When I was in grade school, right here in the United States of
 America, I was taught that our country was the &ldquo;land of
-opportunity&rdquo;.  My teachers told me that my country was special,
+opportunity.&rdquo;  My teachers told me that my country was special,
 because anyone with a good idea and a drive to do good work could make
 a living, and be successful too.  They called it the &ldquo;American
-Dream&rdquo;.</p>
+Dream.&rdquo;</p>
 <p>
 What was the cornerstone to the &ldquo;American Dream&rdquo;?  It was
 equality&mdash;everyone had the same chance in our society to choose
@@ -31,7 +30,7 @@
 <p>
 It turned out that I had some talent for working with
 computers&mdash;in particular, computer software.  Indoctrinated with
-the &ldquo;American Dream&rdquo;, I learned as much as I could about
+the &ldquo;American Dream,&rdquo; I learned as much as I could about
 computer software.  I wanted my chance at success.</p>
 <p>
 I quickly discovered though, that in many cases, not all the players in the
@@ -79,7 +78,6 @@
 it in grade school.  I hope that we won't let Microsoft and others change
 the definition.</p>
 </div>
-</div>
 
 </div><!-- for id="content", starts in the include above -->
 <!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
@@ -120,7 +118,7 @@
 
 <p class="unprintable">Updated:
 <!-- timestamp start -->
-$Date: 2021/08/19 07:36:45 $
+$Date: 2021/09/12 08:14:17 $
 <!-- timestamp end -->
 </p>
 </div>

Index: gpl-american-way.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /webcvs/www/www/philosophy/gpl-american-way.html,v
retrieving revision 1.34
retrieving revision 1.35
diff -u -b -r1.34 -r1.35
--- gpl-american-way.html       19 Aug 2021 07:36:45 -0000      1.34
+++ gpl-american-way.html       12 Sep 2021 08:14:17 -0000      1.35
@@ -10,12 +10,11 @@
 <!--#include virtual="/philosophy/ph-breadcrumb.html" -->
 <!--GNUN: OUT-OF-DATE NOTICE-->
 <!--#include virtual="/server/top-addendum.html" -->
-<div class="reduced-width">
+<div class="article reduced-width">
 <h2>The GNU GPL and the American Way</h2>
 
 <address class="byline">by Richard M. Stallman</address>
 
-<div class="article">
 <p>
 Microsoft describes the GNU General Public License (GNU GPL) as an
 &ldquo;open source&rdquo; license, and says it is against the American
@@ -36,7 +35,7 @@
 cooperation.  This is what leads to free enterprise, to free speech,
 and to free software.</p>
 <p>
-As in &ldquo;free enterprise&rdquo; and &ldquo;free speech&rdquo;, the
+As in &ldquo;free enterprise&rdquo; and &ldquo;free speech,&rdquo; the
 &ldquo;free&rdquo; in &ldquo;free software&rdquo; refers to freedom,
 not price; specifically, it means that you have the freedom to study,
 change, and redistribute the software you use.  These freedoms permit
@@ -96,7 +95,7 @@
 to close off alternatives for them.</p>
 <p>
 Microsoft uses an anticompetitive strategy called &ldquo;embrace and
-extend&rdquo;.  This means they start with the technology others are
+extend.&rdquo;  This means they start with the technology others are
 using, add a minor wrinkle which is secret so that nobody else can
 imitate it, then use that secret wrinkle so that only Microsoft
 software can communicate with other Microsoft software.  In some
@@ -132,7 +131,7 @@
 once is surely simplistic.  To think intelligently about copyrights,
 patents or trademarks, you must think about them separately.  The
 first step is declining to lump them together as &ldquo;intellectual
-property&rdquo;.</p>
+property.&rdquo;</p>
 <p>
 My views about copyright take an hour to expound, but one general
 principle applies: it cannot justify denying the public important
@@ -141,7 +140,6 @@
 prevail.&rdquo; Property rights are meant to advance human well-being,
 not as an excuse to disregard it.</p>
 </div>
-</div>
 
 </div><!-- for id="content", starts in the include above -->
 <!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
@@ -172,6 +170,23 @@
 information on coordinating and contributing translations of this article.</p>
 </div>
 
+<!-- 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 4.0.  Please do NOT change or remove this
+     without talking with the webmasters or licensing team first.
+     Please make sure the copyright date is consistent with the
+     document.  For web pages, it is ok to list just the latest year the
+     document was modified, or published.
+     
+     If you wish to list earlier years, that is ok too.
+     Either "2001, 2002, 2003" or "2001-2003" are ok for specifying
+     years, as long as each year in the range is in fact a copyrightable
+     year, i.e., a year in which the document was published (including
+     being publicly visible on the web or in a revision control system).
+     
+     There is more detail about copyright years in the GNU Maintainers
+     Information document, www.gnu.org/prep/maintain. -->
+
 <p>Copyright &copy; 2001, 2021 Richard M. Stallman</p>
 
 <p>This page is licensed under a <a rel="license"
@@ -182,7 +197,7 @@
 
 <p class="unprintable">Updated:
 <!-- timestamp start -->
-$Date: 2021/08/19 07:36:45 $
+$Date: 2021/09/12 08:14:17 $
 <!-- timestamp end -->
 </p>
 </div>

Index: imperfection-isnt-oppression.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /webcvs/www/www/philosophy/imperfection-isnt-oppression.html,v
retrieving revision 1.10
retrieving revision 1.11
diff -u -b -r1.10 -r1.11
--- imperfection-isnt-oppression.html   5 Sep 2021 09:34:34 -0000       1.10
+++ imperfection-isnt-oppression.html   12 Sep 2021 08:14:17 -0000      1.11
@@ -19,7 +19,7 @@
 <p>When a free program lacks capabilities that users want, that is
   unfortunate; we urge people to add what is missing. Some would go
   further and claim that a program is not even free software if it lacks
-  certain functionality &mdash; that it denies freedom 0 (the freedom to
+  certain functionality&mdash;that it denies freedom 0 (the freedom to
   run the program as you wish) to users or uses that it does not
   support. This argument is misguided because it is based on
   identifying capacity with freedom, and imperfection with oppression.</p>
@@ -102,6 +102,23 @@
 of this article.</p>
 </div>
 
+<!-- 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 4.0.  Please do NOT change or remove this
+     without talking with the webmasters or licensing team first.
+     Please make sure the copyright date is consistent with the
+     document.  For web pages, it is ok to list just the latest year the
+     document was modified, or published.
+     
+     If you wish to list earlier years, that is ok too.
+     Either "2001, 2002, 2003" or "2001-2003" are ok for specifying
+     years, as long as each year in the range is in fact a copyrightable
+     year, i.e., a year in which the document was published (including
+     being publicly visible on the web or in a revision control system).
+     
+     There is more detail about copyright years in the GNU Maintainers
+     Information document, www.gnu.org/prep/maintain. -->
+
 <p>Copyright &copy; 2014, 2021 Free Software Foundation, Inc.</p>
 
 <p>This page is licensed under a <a rel="license"
@@ -112,7 +129,7 @@
 
 <p class="unprintable">Updated:
 <!-- timestamp start -->
-$Date: 2021/09/05 09:34:34 $
+$Date: 2021/09/12 08:14:17 $
 <!-- timestamp end -->
 </p>
 </div>

Index: lessig-fsfs-intro.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /webcvs/www/www/philosophy/lessig-fsfs-intro.html,v
retrieving revision 1.39
retrieving revision 1.40
diff -u -b -r1.39 -r1.40
--- lessig-fsfs-intro.html      5 Sep 2021 09:34:34 -0000       1.39
+++ lessig-fsfs-intro.html      12 Sep 2021 08:14:17 -0000      1.40
@@ -20,7 +20,7 @@
 </address>
 
 <p>
-Every generation has its philosopher &mdash; a writer or an artist who
+Every generation has its philosopher&mdash;a writer or an artist who
 captures the imagination of a time. Sometimes these philosophers are
 recognized as such; often it takes generations before the connection
 is made real. But recognized or not, a time gets marked by the people
@@ -40,7 +40,7 @@
 &ldquo;Code&rdquo; is the technology that makes computers run. Whether
 inscribed in software or burned in hardware, it is the collection of
 instructions, first written in words, that directs the functionality
-of machines. These machines &mdash; computers &mdash; increasingly
+of machines. These machines&mdash;computers&mdash;increasingly
 define and control our life. They determine how phones connect, and
 what runs on TV. They decide whether video can be streamed across a
 broadband link to a computer. They control what a computer reports
@@ -146,7 +146,7 @@
 briefs. They can be copied and integrated into another brief or
 opinion. The &ldquo;source code&rdquo; for American law is by design,
 and by principle, open and free for anyone to take. And take lawyers
-do &mdash; for it is a measure of a great brief that it achieves its
+do&mdash;for it is a measure of a great brief that it achieves its
 creativity through the reuse of what happened before. The source is
 free; creativity and an economy is built upon it.
 </p>
@@ -160,7 +160,7 @@
 flourishes, with later work added to the earlier.
 </p>
 <p>
-We could imagine a legal practice that was different &mdash; briefs
+We could imagine a legal practice that was different&mdash;briefs
 and arguments that were kept secret; rulings that announced a result
 but not the reasoning.  Laws that were kept by the police but
 published to no one else. Regulation that operated without explaining
@@ -193,7 +193,7 @@
 known, and among these, an especially insightful account of the
 changed circumstances that render copyright in the digital world
 suspect. They will serve as a resource for those who seek to
-understand the thought of this most powerful man &mdash; powerful in
+understand the thought of this most powerful man&mdash;powerful in
 his ideas, his passion, and his integrity, even if powerless in every
 other way. They will inspire others who would take these ideas, and
 build upon them.
@@ -206,8 +206,8 @@
 </p>
 <p>
 Yet when our world finally comes to understand the power and danger of
-code &mdash; when it finally sees that code, like laws, or like
-government, must be transparent to be free &mdash; then we will look
+code&mdash;when it finally sees that code, like laws, or like
+government, must be transparent to be free&mdash;then we will look
 back at this uncompromising and persistent programmer and recognize
 the vision he has fought to make real: the vision of a world where
 freedom and knowledge survives the compiler. And we will come to see
@@ -265,6 +265,23 @@
 of this article.</p>
 </div>
 
+<!-- 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 4.0.  Please do NOT change or remove this
+     without talking with the webmasters or licensing team first.
+     Please make sure the copyright date is consistent with the
+     document.  For web pages, it is ok to list just the latest year the
+     document was modified, or published.
+     
+     If you wish to list earlier years, that is ok too.
+     Either "2001, 2002, 2003" or "2001-2003" are ok for specifying
+     years, as long as each year in the range is in fact a copyrightable
+     year, i.e., a year in which the document was published (including
+     being publicly visible on the web or in a revision control system).
+     
+     There is more detail about copyright years in the GNU Maintainers
+     Information document, www.gnu.org/prep/maintain. -->
+
 <p>Copyright &copy; 2002, 2021 Free Software Foundation, Inc.</p>
 
 <p>This page is licensed under a <a rel="license"
@@ -275,7 +292,7 @@
 
 <p class="unprintable">Updated:
 <!-- timestamp start -->
-$Date: 2021/09/05 09:34:34 $
+$Date: 2021/09/12 08:14:17 $
 <!-- timestamp end -->
 </p>
 </div>

Index: lest-codeplex-perplex.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /webcvs/www/www/philosophy/lest-codeplex-perplex.html,v
retrieving revision 1.20
retrieving revision 1.21
diff -u -b -r1.20 -r1.21
--- lest-codeplex-perplex.html  19 Aug 2021 07:36:45 -0000      1.20
+++ lest-codeplex-perplex.html  12 Sep 2021 08:14:17 -0000      1.21
@@ -11,12 +11,11 @@
 <!--#include virtual="/philosophy/ph-breadcrumb.html" -->
 <!--GNUN: OUT-OF-DATE NOTICE-->
 <!--#include virtual="/server/top-addendum.html" -->
-<div class="reduced-width">
+<div class="article reduced-width">
 <h2>Lest CodePlex perplex</h2>
 
 <address class="byline">by Richard Stallman</address>
 
-<div class="article">
 <p>Many in our community are suspicious of the CodePlex Foundation.  With
 its board of directors dominated by Microsoft employees and
 ex-employees, plus apologist Miguel de Icaza, there is plenty of
@@ -29,7 +28,7 @@
 
 <p>The first thing we see is that the organization ducks the issue of
 users' freedom; it uses the term &ldquo;open source&rdquo; and does
-not speak of &ldquo;free software&rdquo;.  These two terms stand for
+not speak of &ldquo;free software.&rdquo;  These two terms stand for
 different philosophies which are based on different values: free
 software's values are freedom and social solidarity, whereas open
 source cites only practical convenience values such as powerful,
@@ -46,7 +45,7 @@
 
 <p>CodePlex follows the same practice.  Its stated goal is to convince
 &ldquo;commercial software companies&rdquo; to contribute more to
-&ldquo;open source&rdquo;.  Since nearly all open source programs are
+&ldquo;open source.&rdquo;  Since nearly all open source programs are
 also free software, these programs will probably be free, but the
 &ldquo;open source&rdquo; philosophy doesn't teach developers to
 defend their freedom. If they don't understand the importance of this
@@ -56,7 +55,7 @@
 dependent on proprietary platforms.</p>
 
 <p>This foundation is not the first Microsoft project to bear the name
-&ldquo;CodePlex&rdquo;.  There is also codeplex.com, a project hosting
+&ldquo;CodePlex.&rdquo;  There is also codeplex.com, a project hosting
 site, whose list of allowed licenses excludes GNU GPL version 3.
 Perhaps this reflects the fact that GPL version 3 is designed to
 protect a program's free software status from being subverted by
@@ -69,7 +68,7 @@
 all software developed by a business&mdash;whether free or
 proprietary&mdash;is automatically commercial software.  But there is
 a widespread public confusion between &ldquo;commercial
-software&rdquo; and &ldquo;proprietary software&rdquo;.  (See
+software&rdquo; and &ldquo;proprietary software.&rdquo;  (See
 <a href="/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html">
 Words to Avoid or Use with Care</a>.)</p>
 
@@ -132,7 +131,6 @@
 continues to act to harm us.  We would be fools indeed to let anything
 distract us from that.</p>
 </div>
-</div>
 
 </div><!-- for id="content", starts in the include above -->
 <!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
@@ -191,7 +189,7 @@
 
 <p class="unprintable">Updated:
 <!-- timestamp start -->
-$Date: 2021/08/19 07:36:45 $
+$Date: 2021/09/12 08:14:17 $
 <!-- timestamp end -->
 </p>
 </div>

Index: linux-gnu-freedom.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /webcvs/www/www/philosophy/linux-gnu-freedom.html,v
retrieving revision 1.51
retrieving revision 1.52
diff -u -b -r1.51 -r1.52
--- linux-gnu-freedom.html      19 Aug 2021 07:36:45 -0000      1.51
+++ linux-gnu-freedom.html      12 Sep 2021 08:14:19 -0000      1.52
@@ -13,12 +13,11 @@
 <!--#include virtual="/philosophy/ph-breadcrumb.html" -->
 <!--GNUN: OUT-OF-DATE NOTICE-->
 <!--#include virtual="/server/top-addendum.html" -->
-<div class="reduced-width">
+<div class="article reduced-width">
 <h2>Linux, GNU, and Freedom</h2>
 
 <address class="byline">by Richard M. Stallman</address>
 
-<div class="article">
 <p>
   Since <a
   
href="https://web.archive.org/web/20190404115541/http://linux.sys-con.com/node/32755";>Joe
 Barr's
@@ -28,10 +27,10 @@
 <p>
   When SIGLINUX invited me to speak, it was a &ldquo;Linux User
   Group&rdquo;; that is, a group for users of the GNU/Linux system
-  which calls the whole system &ldquo;Linux&rdquo;.  So I replied
+  which calls the whole system &ldquo;Linux.&rdquo;  So I replied
   politely that if they'd like someone from the GNU Project to give a
   speech for them, they ought to treat the GNU Project right, and call
-  the system &ldquo;GNU/Linux&rdquo;.  The system is a variant of GNU,
+  the system &ldquo;GNU/Linux.&rdquo;  The system is a variant of GNU,
   and the GNU Project is its principal developer, so social convention
   says to call it by the name we chose.  Unless there are powerful
   reasons for an exception, I usually decline to give speeches for
@@ -44,14 +43,14 @@
   user groups.  Our webmaster told him that we would not list it under
   the name &ldquo;SIGLINUX&rdquo; because that name implies that the
   group is about Linux.  Strunk proposed to change the name to
-  &ldquo;SIGFREE&rdquo;, and our webmaster agreed that would be fine.
+  &ldquo;SIGFREE,&rdquo; and our webmaster agreed that would be fine.
   (Barr's article said we rejected this proposal.)  However, the group
-  ultimately decided to stay with &ldquo;SIGLINUX&rdquo;.</p>
+  ultimately decided to stay with &ldquo;SIGLINUX.&rdquo;</p>
 <p>
   At that point, the matter came to my attention again, and I
   suggested they consider other possible names.  There are many names
   they could choose that would not call the system
-  &ldquo;Linux&rdquo;, and I hope they will come up with one they
+  &ldquo;Linux,&rdquo; and I hope they will come up with one they
   like.  There the matter rests as far as I know.</p>
 <p>
   Is it true, as Barr writes, that some people see these actions as an
@@ -80,10 +79,10 @@
   about the GNU Project and think them justified; his fellows will
   support him, because they want each other's support in maintaining
   their prejudice.  Dissenters can be reviled; thus, if I decline to
-  participate in an activity under the rubric of &ldquo;Linux&rdquo;,
+  participate in an activity under the rubric of &ldquo;Linux,&rdquo;
   they may find that inexcusable, and hold me responsible for the ill
   will they feel afterwards.  When so many people want me to call the
-  system &ldquo;Linux&rdquo;, how can I, who merely launched its
+  system &ldquo;Linux,&rdquo; how can I, who merely launched its
   development, not comply?  And forcibly denying them a speech is
   forcibly making them unhappy.  That's coercion, as bad as
   Microsoft!</p>
@@ -130,8 +129,8 @@
   Will enough of us care?  That depends on many things; among them,
   how much influence the GNU Project has, and how much influence Linus
   Torvalds has.  The GNU Project says, &ldquo;Value your
-  freedom!&rdquo;.  Joe Barr says, &ldquo;Choose between nonfree and
-  free programs on technical grounds alone!&rdquo;.  If people credit
+  freedom!.&rdquo;  Joe Barr says, &ldquo;Choose between nonfree and
+  free programs on technical grounds alone!.&rdquo;  If people credit
   Torvalds as the main developer of the GNU/Linux system, that's not
   just inaccurate, it also makes his message more
   influential&mdash;and that message says, &ldquo;Nonfree software is
@@ -238,7 +237,6 @@
   Linux</a> is now maintained for use in free GNU/Linux
   distributions.</p>
 </div>
-</div>
 
 </div><!-- for id="content", starts in the include above -->
 <!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
@@ -269,6 +267,23 @@
 information on coordinating and contributing translations of this article.</p>
 </div>
 
+<!-- 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 4.0.  Please do NOT change or remove this
+     without talking with the webmasters or licensing team first.
+     Please make sure the copyright date is consistent with the
+     document.  For web pages, it is ok to list just the latest year the
+     document was modified, or published.
+     
+     If you wish to list earlier years, that is ok too.
+     Either "2001, 2002, 2003" or "2001-2003" are ok for specifying
+     years, as long as each year in the range is in fact a copyrightable
+     year, i.e., a year in which the document was published (including
+     being publicly visible on the web or in a revision control system).
+     
+     There is more detail about copyright years in the GNU Maintainers
+     Information document, www.gnu.org/prep/maintain. -->
+
 <p>Copyright &copy; 2002, 2021 Richard M. Stallman</p>
 
 <p>This page is licensed under a <a rel="license"
@@ -279,7 +294,7 @@
 
 <p class="unprintable">Updated:
 <!-- timestamp start -->
-$Date: 2021/08/19 07:36:45 $
+$Date: 2021/09/12 08:14:19 $
 <!-- timestamp end -->
 </p>
 </div>

Index: microsoft-old.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /webcvs/www/www/philosophy/microsoft-old.html,v
retrieving revision 1.20
retrieving revision 1.21
diff -u -b -r1.20 -r1.21
--- microsoft-old.html  19 Aug 2021 07:36:45 -0000      1.20
+++ microsoft-old.html  12 Sep 2021 08:14:19 -0000      1.21
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@
 <!--#include virtual="/philosophy/ph-breadcrumb.html" -->
 <!--GNUN: OUT-OF-DATE NOTICE-->
 <!--#include virtual="/server/top-addendum.html" -->
-<div class="reduced-width">
+<div class="article reduced-width">
 <h2>Is Microsoft the Great Satan? (Old Version)</h2>
 
 <div class="announcement">
@@ -19,7 +19,6 @@
 </div>
 <hr class="thin" />
 
-<div class="article">
 <p>Many people think of Microsoft as the monster menace of the software
 industry. There is even a campaign to boycott Microsoft. This feeling
 has intensified since Microsoft expressed active hostility towards
@@ -42,7 +41,7 @@
 software. At the FSF, we don't run any proprietary software&mdash;not
 from Microsoft or anyone else.</p>
 
-<p>In the &ldquo;Halloween documents&rdquo;, released at the end of
+<p>In the &ldquo;Halloween documents,&rdquo; released at the end of
 October 1998, Microsoft executives stated an intention to use various
 methods to obstruct the development of free software: specifically,
 designing secret protocols and file formats, and patenting algorithms
@@ -54,7 +53,7 @@
 seems, we are among the intended targets. But that change in
 motivation has no practical consequence, because secret conventions
 and software patents obstruct everyone, regardless of the
-&ldquo;intended target&rdquo;.</p>
+&ldquo;intended target.&rdquo;</p>
 
 <p>Secrecy and patents do threaten free software. They have obstructed
 us greatly in the past, and we must expect they will do so even more
@@ -66,7 +65,6 @@
 
 <p>Thank you, Microsoft, and please get out of the way.</p>
 </div>
-</div>
 
 </div><!-- for id="content", starts in the include above -->
 <!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
@@ -124,7 +122,7 @@
 
 <p class="unprintable">Updated:
 <!-- timestamp start -->
-$Date: 2021/08/19 07:36:45 $
+$Date: 2021/09/12 08:14:19 $
 <!-- timestamp end -->
 </p>
 </div>

Index: misinterpreting-copyright.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /webcvs/www/www/philosophy/misinterpreting-copyright.html,v
retrieving revision 1.62
retrieving revision 1.63
diff -u -b -r1.62 -r1.63
--- misinterpreting-copyright.html      5 Sep 2021 09:34:35 -0000       1.62
+++ misinterpreting-copyright.html      12 Sep 2021 08:14:19 -0000      1.63
@@ -353,9 +353,9 @@
 <p>
 An even worse law, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), was
 designed to bring back what was then called &ldquo;copy
-protection&rdquo; &mdash; now known
+protection&rdquo;&mdash;now known
 as <a href="/proprietary/proprietary-drm.html">DRM</a> (Digital
-Restrictions Management) &mdash; which users already detested,
+Restrictions Management)&mdash;which users already detested,
 by making it a crime to defeat the restrictions, or even publish
 information about how to defeat them.  This law ought to be called the
 &ldquo;Domination by Media Corporations Act&rdquo; because it
@@ -676,7 +676,7 @@
 
 <p class="unprintable">Updated:
 <!-- timestamp start -->
-$Date: 2021/09/05 09:34:35 $
+$Date: 2021/09/12 08:14:19 $
 <!-- timestamp end -->
 </p>
 </div>

Index: my_doom.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /webcvs/www/www/philosophy/my_doom.html,v
retrieving revision 1.35
retrieving revision 1.36
diff -u -b -r1.35 -r1.36
--- my_doom.html        19 Aug 2021 07:36:45 -0000      1.35
+++ my_doom.html        12 Sep 2021 08:14:19 -0000      1.36
@@ -10,13 +10,12 @@
 <!--#include virtual="/philosophy/ph-breadcrumb.html" -->
 <!--GNUN: OUT-OF-DATE NOTICE-->
 <!--#include virtual="/server/top-addendum.html" -->
-<div class="reduced-width">
+<div class="article reduced-width">
 <h2>MyDoom and You</h2>
 
 <address class="byline">by <a href="https://www.stallman.org/";>Richard
 Stallman</a></address>
 
-<div class="article">
 <p>
 I grew up in a community whose other members sometimes committed crimes as
 serious as murder. The city of New York, with its 8 million
@@ -27,8 +26,8 @@
 Other evils involving information rather than physical violence were
 common also. For instance, some New York police regularly lied on the
 witness stand, and even made up a word for it: instead of
-&ldquo;testifying&rdquo;, they described court appearances as
-&ldquo;testilying&rdquo;. Some New York programmers fell into the
+&ldquo;testifying,&rdquo; they described court appearances as
+&ldquo;testilying.&rdquo; Some New York programmers fell into the
 lawful but socially destructive practice of proprietary software: they
 offered other people attractive software packages without source code,
 and exacted a promise not to share them with anyone else.</p>
@@ -92,7 +91,6 @@
 without proof, and there is no excuse for guilt by association.
 Not in New York, not in Cambridge, and not in the Free World.</p> 
 </div>
-</div>
 
 </div><!-- for id="content", starts in the include above -->
 <!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
@@ -123,7 +121,24 @@
 information on coordinating and contributing translations of this article.</p>
 </div>
 
-<p>Copyright &copy; 2004, 2021 Free Software Foundation, Inc.</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 4.0.  Please do NOT change or remove this
+     without talking with the webmasters or licensing team first.
+     Please make sure the copyright date is consistent with the
+     document.  For web pages, it is ok to list just the latest year the
+     document was modified, or published.
+     
+     If you wish to list earlier years, that is ok too.
+     Either "2001, 2002, 2003" or "2001-2003" are ok for specifying
+     years, as long as each year in the range is in fact a copyrightable
+     year, i.e., a year in which the document was published (including
+     being publicly visible on the web or in a revision control system).
+     
+     There is more detail about copyright years in the GNU Maintainers
+     Information document, www.gnu.org/prep/maintain. -->
+
+p>Copyright &copy; 2004, 2021 Free Software Foundation, Inc.</p>
 
 <p>This page is licensed under a <a rel="license"
 href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/";>Creative
@@ -133,7 +148,7 @@
 
 <p class="unprintable">Updated:
 <!-- timestamp start -->
-$Date: 2021/08/19 07:36:45 $
+$Date: 2021/09/12 08:14:19 $
 <!-- timestamp end -->
 </p>
 </div>

Index: open-source-misses-the-point.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /webcvs/www/www/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html,v
retrieving revision 1.100
retrieving revision 1.101
diff -u -b -r1.100 -r1.101
--- open-source-misses-the-point.html   19 Aug 2021 07:53:55 -0000      1.100
+++ open-source-misses-the-point.html   12 Sep 2021 08:14:19 -0000      1.101
@@ -10,12 +10,11 @@
 <!--#include virtual="/philosophy/ph-breadcrumb.html" -->
 <!--GNUN: OUT-OF-DATE NOTICE-->
 <!--#include virtual="/server/top-addendum.html" -->
-<div class="reduced-width">
+<div class="article reduced-width">
 <h2>Why Open Source Misses the Point of Free Software</h2>
 
 <address class="byline">by Richard Stallman</address>
 
-<div class="article">
 <div class="important"><p>
 The terms &ldquo;free software&rdquo; and &ldquo;open
 source&rdquo; stand for almost the same range of programs.  However,
@@ -47,7 +46,7 @@
 operating system</a>.  Most of these users, however, have never heard of 
 the ethical reasons for which we developed this system and built the free 
 software community, because nowadays this system and community are more 
-often spoken of as &ldquo;open source&rdquo;, attributing them to a 
+often spoken of as &ldquo;open source,&rdquo; attributing them to a 
 different philosophy in which these freedoms are hardly mentioned.</p>
 
 <p>The free software movement has campaigned for computer users'
@@ -112,7 +111,7 @@
 want people to know we stand for freedom, so we do not accept being
 mislabeled as open source supporters.  What we advocate is not
 &ldquo;open source,&rdquo; and what we oppose is not &ldquo;closed
-source&rdquo;.  To make this clear, we avoid using those terms.
+source.&rdquo;  To make this clear, we avoid using those terms.
 </p>
 
 <h3>Practical Differences between Free Software and Open Source</h3>
@@ -140,7 +139,7 @@
 computers check signatures on their executable programs to block users
 from installing different executables; only one privileged company can
 make executables that can run in the device or can access its full
-capabilities.  We call these devices &ldquo;tyrants&rdquo;, and the
+capabilities.  We call these devices &ldquo;tyrants,&rdquo; and the
 practice is called &ldquo;tivoization&rdquo; after the product (Tivo)
 where we first saw it.  Even if the executable is made from free
 source code, and nominally carries a free license, the users cannot
@@ -246,7 +245,7 @@
 criteria for software licensing are simply not pertinent.  The only
 thing these activities have in common is that they somehow invite
 people to participate.  They stretch the term so far that it only
-means &ldquo;participatory&rdquo; or &ldquo;transparent&rdquo;, or
+means &ldquo;participatory&rdquo; or &ldquo;transparent,&rdquo; or
 less than that.  At worst, it
 has <a 
href="https://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/17/opinion/sunday/morozov-open-and-closed.html";>
 become a vacuous buzzword</a>.</p>
@@ -435,7 +434,6 @@
 than ever.  Every time you say &ldquo;free software&rdquo; rather than
 &ldquo;open source,&rdquo; you help our cause.</p>
 <div class="column-limit"></div>
-</div>
 
 <h3 class="footnote">Note</h3>
 
@@ -486,6 +484,23 @@
 of this article.</p>
 </div>
 
+<!-- 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 4.0.  Please do NOT change or remove this
+     without talking with the webmasters or licensing team first.
+     Please make sure the copyright date is consistent with the
+     document.  For web pages, it is ok to list just the latest year the
+     document was modified, or published.
+     
+     If you wish to list earlier years, that is ok too.
+     Either "2001, 2002, 2003" or "2001-2003" are ok for specifying
+     years, as long as each year in the range is in fact a copyrightable
+     year, i.e., a year in which the document was published (including
+     being publicly visible on the web or in a revision control system).
+     
+     There is more detail about copyright years in the GNU Maintainers
+     Information document, www.gnu.org/prep/maintain. -->
+
 <p>Copyright &copy; 2007, 2010, 2012-2016, 2019-2021 Richard Stallman</p>
 
 <p>This page is licensed under a <a rel="license"
@@ -496,7 +511,7 @@
 
 <p class="unprintable">Updated:
 <!-- timestamp start -->
-$Date: 2021/08/19 07:53:55 $
+$Date: 2021/09/12 08:14:19 $
 <!-- timestamp end -->
 </p>
 </div>

Index: shouldbefree.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /webcvs/www/www/philosophy/shouldbefree.html,v
retrieving revision 1.73
retrieving revision 1.74
diff -u -b -r1.73 -r1.74
--- shouldbefree.html   28 Aug 2021 13:29:46 -0000      1.73
+++ shouldbefree.html   12 Sep 2021 08:14:19 -0000      1.74
@@ -297,7 +297,7 @@
 will not be allowed to use their work.  This leads to an attitude of
 cynicism or denial.  A programmer may describe enthusiastically the
 work that he finds technically exciting; then when asked, &ldquo;Will I be
-permitted to use it?&rdquo;, his face falls, and he admits the answer is no. 
+permitted to use it?&rdquo; his face falls, and he admits the answer is no. 
 To avoid feeling discouraged, he either ignores this fact most of the
 time or adopts a cynical stance designed to minimize the importance of
 it.</p>
@@ -567,7 +567,7 @@
 <p>
    It is common today for university researchers to get grants to
 develop a system, develop it nearly to the point of completion and
-call that &ldquo;finished&rdquo;, and then start companies where they
+call that &ldquo;finished,&rdquo; and then start companies where they
 really finish the project and make it usable.  Sometimes they declare
 the unfinished version &ldquo;free&rdquo;; if they are thoroughly
 corrupt, they instead get an exclusive license from the university.
@@ -878,6 +878,23 @@
 information on coordinating and contributing translations of this article.</p>
 </div>
 
+<!-- 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 4.0.  Please do NOT change or remove this
+     without talking with the webmasters or licensing team first.
+     Please make sure the copyright date is consistent with the
+     document.  For web pages, it is ok to list just the latest year the
+     document was modified, or published.
+     
+     If you wish to list earlier years, that is ok too.
+     Either "2001, 2002, 2003" or "2001-2003" are ok for specifying
+     years, as long as each year in the range is in fact a copyrightable
+     year, i.e., a year in which the document was published (including
+     being publicly visible on the web or in a revision control system).
+     
+     There is more detail about copyright years in the GNU Maintainers
+     Information document, www.gnu.org/prep/maintain. -->
+
 <p>Copyright &copy; 1991, 1992, 1998, 2006, 2010, 2021 Free Software
 Foundation, Inc.</p>
 
@@ -889,7 +906,7 @@
 
 <p class="unprintable">Updated:
 <!-- timestamp start -->
-$Date: 2021/08/28 13:29:46 $
+$Date: 2021/09/12 08:14:19 $
 <!-- timestamp end -->
 </p>
 </div>

Index: words-to-avoid.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /webcvs/www/www/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html,v
retrieving revision 1.271
retrieving revision 1.272
diff -u -b -r1.271 -r1.272
--- words-to-avoid.html 5 Sep 2021 10:10:13 -0000       1.271
+++ words-to-avoid.html 12 Sep 2021 08:14:19 -0000      1.272
@@ -242,7 +242,7 @@
 <p>
 To refer to published works as &ldquo;assets,&rdquo; or &ldquo;digital
 assets,&rdquo; is even worse than calling
-them <a href="#Content">&ldquo;content&rdquo;</a> &mdash; it presumes
+them <a href="#Content">&ldquo;content&rdquo;</a>&mdash;it presumes
 they have no value to society except commercial value.</p>
 
 <!-- GNUN-SORT-NEXT-ITEM -->
@@ -573,7 +573,7 @@
 <!-- GNUN-SORT-END-KEY -->
 <p>
 Copyright is an artificial privilege, handed out by the state to
-achieve a public interest and lasting a period of time &mdash; not a
+achieve a public interest and lasting a period of time&mdash;not a
 natural right like owning a house or a shirt.  Lawyers used to
 recognize this by referring to the recipient of that privilege as a
 &ldquo;copyright holder.&rdquo;</p>
@@ -951,7 +951,7 @@
 <!-- GNUN-SORT-END-KEY -->
 <p>
 The term &ldquo;modern&rdquo; makes sense from a descriptive
-perspective &mdash; for instance, solely to distinguish newer periods
+perspective&mdash;for instance, solely to distinguish newer periods
 and ways from older ones.</p>
 
 <p>It becomes a problem when it carries the presumption that older
@@ -1298,8 +1298,8 @@
 ambiguous way.  Ostensibly it refers to how a program's source is
 distributed, but the text confuses this with the development
 methodology.  It distinguishes &ldquo;open source&rdquo; and
-&rdquo;shared source&rdquo; as answers, but they overlap &mdash;
-Microsoft uses the latter as a marketing term to cover a range of
+&rdquo;shared source&rdquo; as answers, but they overlap&mdash;Microsoft
+uses the latter as a marketing term to cover a range of
 practices, some of which are &ldquo;open source.&rdquo;  Thus, this
 term really conveys no coherent information, but it provides an
 opportunity to say &ldquo;open source&rdquo; in pages describing free
@@ -1448,7 +1448,7 @@
 
 <p class="unprintable">Updated:
 <!-- timestamp start -->
-$Date: 2021/09/05 10:10:13 $
+$Date: 2021/09/12 08:14:19 $
 <!-- timestamp end -->
 </p>
 </div>



reply via email to

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