4 ms·

https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html your misconception of the position is addressed in the above essay. RM

https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html your misconception of the position is addressed in the above essay. RMS: Many people believe that the spirit of the GNU Project is that you should not charge money for distributing copies of software, or that you should charge as little as possible—just enough to cover the cost. This is a misunderstanding.

chestervonwinch 11y ago
But isn't the distribution charge nullified by the first person who distributes the software free of charge (and they are free to do so because the software is libre)?
- throwawayaway 11y ago
  Not far from the top of the article: Since free software is not a matter of price, a low price doesn't make the software free, or even closer to free. So if you are redistributing copies of free software, you might as well charge a substantial fee and make some money. Redistributing free software is a good and legitimate activity; if you do it, you might as well make a profit from it. also: making closed and open versions is OK by rms. https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling-exceptions.html https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling-exceptions.html
  - discordianfish 11y ago
    I think the point is that once you sold a copy of your free software once, the buyer may give it away for free. Realistically I'd say it's not really possible to make money by selling free software. That's okay if you can make money off from services and integration but selling isn't really possible and some free software advocates tend to ignore that fact. Especially if it's about other digital content like music. I don't think that Wu-Tang Clan's model of just selling one copy will very be sustainable.
    - throwawayaway 11y ago
      It is possible, I'm sure there's other examples - here's one: http://www.juce.com/buy http://www.juce.com/buy If you think of kickstarter etc for free software projects, that is like selling one copy.

chestervonwinch 11y ago

But isn't the distribution charge nullified by the first person who distributes the software free of charge (and they are free to do so because the software is libre)?

throwawayaway 11y ago
Not far from the top of the article: Since free software is not a matter of price, a low price doesn't make the software free, or even closer to free. So if you are redistributing copies of free software, you might as well charge a substantial fee and make some money. Redistributing free software is a good and legitimate activity; if you do it, you might as well make a profit from it. also: making closed and open versions is OK by rms. https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling-exceptions.html https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling-exceptions.html
- discordianfish 11y ago
  I think the point is that once you sold a copy of your free software once, the buyer may give it away for free. Realistically I'd say it's not really possible to make money by selling free software. That's okay if you can make money off from services and integration but selling isn't really possible and some free software advocates tend to ignore that fact. Especially if it's about other digital content like music. I don't think that Wu-Tang Clan's model of just selling one copy will very be sustainable.
  - throwawayaway 11y ago
    It is possible, I'm sure there's other examples - here's one: http://www.juce.com/buy http://www.juce.com/buy If you think of kickstarter etc for free software projects, that is like selling one copy.