From: Lee Daniel Crocker (lcrocker@calweb.com)
Date: Thu Mar 27 1997 - 01:15:03 MST
> Lee's argument for leaving the (C) off could work in some cases, but
> probably not in many others. It has to be the case that the extra
> distribution which the works would receive by being unrestricted would
> have considerable benefit. This benefit has to be great enough that,
> even though it is probably spread out through the whole society, that
> portion which applies to the original author of the works will be greater
> than what he would have received had he controlled the distribution.
>
> An example of this might be some of the Gnu software. Perhaps the
> authors of the Gnu C compiler receive more direct benefit from the existence
> of programs built using that compiler than they would have received had
> they charged for it.
I should point out that Gnu software is hideously restricted--it is the
farthest thing from my vision, and that he touts "freedom" with it is
unpardonable hypocrisy. Stallman is a socialist merely trading one set
of chains for another. Gnu software is subject to a restrictive license
that forbids many uses, most of which would be the natural uses to which
a commercial enterprise would otherwise put it.
-- Lee Daniel Crocker <lee@piclab.com> <http://www.piclab.com/lcrocker.html> "All inventions or works of authorship original to me, herein and past, are placed irrevocably in the public domain, and may be used or modified for any purpose, without permission, attribution, or notification."--LDC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:44:18 MST