Re: Removing non-free - reality check.

[Craig Sanders <cas@taz.net.au>]

On Sun, Jun 11, 2000 at 08:04:23PM -0400, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> Craig Sanders <cas@taz.net.au> writes:
> 
> > yes, it is vandalism. it is senseless destruction, and those who are
> > proposing it ought to hang their heads in shame. it is a vicious,
> > vindictive, and malicious attack against debian, debian users, and
> > debian developers.
>
> It is not possible to vandalize something you own, no matter how
> senseless an act may be.  If Debian chooses to destroy non-free, no
> matter how horribly, it is not vandalism, by definition.

firstly, you are wrong. ownership has nothing to do with vandalism. for
example, if you were rich enough to buy a work of art (say an antique
vase or a famous painting) and decided to destroy it, your action would
still be vandalism (not to mention stupidity), regardless of the fact
that you owned it.

secondly, neither you nor i nor anyone else *owns* debian. we are
volunteers contributin our time and skills to the project, but we do not
own it. at most, we hold it in trust for everyone and have a (voluntary)
duty to preserve it from harm.

> > what is so hard to understand about the phrases "if you don't like
> > non-free, then don't use it" and "don't inflict your 'morality' on
> > everyone else, leave other people to make their own choices"?
>
> Not much.  

so you can comprehend the concept in theory, but the practice is beyond
you? perhaps there's hope for you yet.


> Maybe if we could convince the authors of non-free of this, then we
> wouldn't need it.  After all, it is the fact that they have noisome
> restrictions that causes the problem.

1. it's THEIR software, not yours. they are the ones who decide what
license terms to use. if you can't accept the terms of the license, then
don't use the software.

2. they are not forcing you to use their software. they write it and
if you can abide by the terms of the license, then you can use it or
do whatever else the license terms allow you to do. no coercion, no
threats, no force. your choice (and everyone else's), to use it or not.

3. the only problem here is that there are a handful of rabid zealots
with fascist tendencies trying to inflict their personal sense of
'morality' on everyone else. take a lesson from history, "holy"
crusaders invariably do more harm than good, and ultimately creating an
atmosphere of hatred and distrust.

this proposed general resolution will, if it gets to a vote and if it
passes, do incalculable damage to debian and to the free software
movement - it is the moral equivalent of the US stance in the vietnam
war - "we had to bomb the village in order to save it".

craig

--
craig sanders