4 ms·

It would be a signal. In the long run, it would affect what sort of contributors and users GNOME would have -- people from the Open Source camp who think propr

It would be a signal. In the long run, it would affect what sort of contributors and users GNOME would have -- people from the Open Source camp who think proprietary software is a nuisance but not "immoral" or "evil" as Mr. Stallman suggests. Or people from the Free Software camp who think all proprietary software is "immoral" and "evil" and should thus be forbidden by law. Of course, it would also be a blow for the Free Software community if a major project decides to stop supporting/promoting its political goals. In the short run, of course, only a few words on the GNOME homepage would have to be changed.

axod 17y ago
>> "Or people from the Free Software camp who think all proprietary software is "immoral" and "evil" and should thus be forbidden by law." Do people really hold these ridiculous fundamentalist views? :/
- cschwarm 17y ago
  Well, this is basically the essence of the political views of the Free Software movement, according to Mr. Stallman's essays and other statements. Many supporters don't get this, though. Mr. Stallman repeatedly called proprietary software "unethical" and "immoral", words we usually use to describe theft, rape and murder. If you assume the premise to be true, forbidding proprietary software by law is a rational conclusion. Then, it's just a matter of political power. From an interview with Mr. Stallman [1]: "We have a paradoxical situation where one particular area of business [...] uses a particular business practice that's based on subjugating the public, based on dividing and conquering. Well, when there's a business practice that conflicts with an important value like freedom and community, prohibit it." And further: (Interviewer): "Should, should all software be free?" (Mr. Stallman): "Yes." From a different interview [2]: "Non-free software is basically antisocial, it subjugates it users, and it should not exist." [1] http://www.pigdog.org/interviews/stallman/interview_with_stallman3.html http://www.pigdog.org/interviews/stallman/interview_with_sta... [2] http://www.zmag.org/znet/viewArticle/4795 http://www.zmag.org/znet/viewArticle/4795

axod 17y ago

>> "Or people from the Free Software camp who think all proprietary software is "immoral" and "evil" and should thus be forbidden by law." Do people really hold these ridiculous fundamentalist views? :/

cschwarm 17y ago
Well, this is basically the essence of the political views of the Free Software movement, according to Mr. Stallman's essays and other statements. Many supporters don't get this, though. Mr. Stallman repeatedly called proprietary software "unethical" and "immoral", words we usually use to describe theft, rape and murder. If you assume the premise to be true, forbidding proprietary software by law is a rational conclusion. Then, it's just a matter of political power. From an interview with Mr. Stallman [1]: "We have a paradoxical situation where one particular area of business [...] uses a particular business practice that's based on subjugating the public, based on dividing and conquering. Well, when there's a business practice that conflicts with an important value like freedom and community, prohibit it." And further: (Interviewer): "Should, should all software be free?" (Mr. Stallman): "Yes." From a different interview [2]: "Non-free software is basically antisocial, it subjugates it users, and it should not exist." [1] http://www.pigdog.org/interviews/stallman/interview_with_stallman3.html http://www.pigdog.org/interviews/stallman/interview_with_sta... [2] http://www.zmag.org/znet/viewArticle/4795 http://www.zmag.org/znet/viewArticle/4795