license and legality (was: what shall I do?)

list at list at
Tue Jan 13 10:13:04 UTC 2004

Am Dienstag, dem 13. Jan 2004 schrieb Ricardo Andere de Mello:

> > Using non-free software is never justifiable; be it its price or
> > whatever.  Would you also break the license of the GPL for example?
> > Because there is no difference between unauthorized copying of
> > non-free software and free software.  It is still a breach of the
> > license.

> Who cares to the license?

We do!

> I'll do what I think is "right". If GPL stops me from doing what I 
> believe, that is to free knowledge, I'll certainly break it. 
> My compromise is with what I believe, not with a piece of paper.

I think you don't know what you are talking about.

What is the GPL stopping you from?
If you really want to break the GPL then don't talk about freedom or 
helping other people, because then you do quite the opposite!

> > The whole argument that non-free software costs to much is totally
> > bogus, because free software can cost as much, or even more. Just
> > because it is Free Software does not imply that it is gratis software.

It is true that Free Software _can_ cost as much, but it usually 
doesn't. And of course you are always allowed to copy it for free.
It is true, that Free Software isn't always gratis software, but it
often is.

I think the costs are a good argument, but one for Free Software, not 
against it.

It's a good argument as well for commercial resellers, because they 
can charge as much as they want, _and_ it is a good argument for the 
users, because they don't have to pay it. ;-)
This sounds absurd, but it works: Users really buy GNU/Linux 
distributions - but only one single copy for themselves and their 

> > The argument about "educating" people, is also bogus since non-free
> > software doesn't help in that regard--you can't study the code, or
> > muck around with it.

> I think you don't get the point. The whole discussion is that "free" and 
> "non-free" should be more acessible to the people

Free Software is there to make it more accessible in contrast to 
non-free software. You are talking as if free and non-free were the 
same, but it isn't.

Hmm, sorry, but I think you first should read, what Free Software 
is about.


More information about the Discussion mailing list