From: Charlie (charlie@antipope.org)
Date: Tue May 02 2000 - 01:17:37 MDT
On Mon, May 01, 2000 at 12:33:14PM -0700, Zero Powers wrote:
> >The issue isn't downloads, its hardcopy, and I'd be very interested in
> >finding sources of cds for 2-3 dollars. The utility cost of downloading
> >100M or more, especially if your local phone usage rates are not capped,
> >is less than going out and buying the CD.
>
> So for you, software isn't free unless the supplier puts it onto some
> physical storage medium and brings it to you for no charge? If that's the
> case then, for you, there will probably never be STAAFL.
The issue here is linguistic; we'd be better off speaking in French.
In English, we have one word, "free", that can be used in different
contexts; "you can drink as much free beer as you can" versus "you have
complete freedom of speech". The first meaning is, "you do not have to
pay for this". The second is, "nobody may legally stop you from doing
this." Free software, by the OSD and the FSF, adheres to the second
definition; whether it also adheres to the first is irrelevant. And the
fact that free software is software liberty is one that the press tend
to get confused over -- never mind the business community (who don't
generally think in terms of civil rights), and the public.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:28:21 MST