diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'examples/frontend_blog/articles/scrap1_22.html')
| -rw-r--r-- | examples/frontend_blog/articles/scrap1_22.html | 236 |
1 files changed, 236 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/examples/frontend_blog/articles/scrap1_22.html b/examples/frontend_blog/articles/scrap1_22.html new file mode 100644 index 00000000..2332e07d --- /dev/null +++ b/examples/frontend_blog/articles/scrap1_22.html @@ -0,0 +1,236 @@ +<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/loose.dtd"> +<html> +<!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected Essays of Richard M. Stallman. + +Free Software Foundation + +51 Franklin Street, Fifth Floor + +Boston, MA 02110-1335 +Copyright C 2002, 2010 Free Software Foundation, Inc. +Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire book are permitted +worldwide, without royalty, in any medium, provided this notice is +preserved. Permission is granted to copy and distribute translations +of this book from the original English into another language provided +the translation has been approved by the Free Software Foundation and +the copyright notice and this permission notice are preserved on all +copies. + +ISBN 978-0-9831592-0-9 +Cover design by Rob Myers. + +Cover photograph by Peter Hinely. + --> +<!-- Created on February 18, 2016 by texi2html 1.82 +texi2html was written by: + Lionel Cons <Lionel.Cons@cern.ch> (original author) + Karl Berry <karl@freefriends.org> + Olaf Bachmann <obachman@mathematik.uni-kl.de> + and many others. +Maintained by: Many creative people. +Send bugs and suggestions to <texi2html-bug@nongnu.org> +--> +<head> +<title>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 22. Copyleft: Pragmatic Idealism</title> + +<meta name="description" content="This is the second edition of Richard Stallman's collection of essays."> +<meta name="keywords" content="Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 22. Copyleft: Pragmatic Idealism"> +<meta name="resource-type" content="document"> +<meta name="distribution" content="global"> +<meta name="Generator" content="texi2html 1.82"> +<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"> +<style type="text/css"> +<!-- +a.summary-letter {text-decoration: none} +blockquote.smallquotation {font-size: smaller} +pre.display {font-family: serif} +pre.format {font-family: serif} +pre.menu-comment {font-family: serif} +pre.menu-preformatted {font-family: serif} +pre.smalldisplay {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller} +pre.smallexample {font-size: smaller} +pre.smallformat {font-family: serif; font-size: smaller} +pre.smalllisp {font-size: smaller} +span.roman {font-family:serif; font-weight:normal;} +span.sansserif {font-family:sans-serif; font-weight:normal;} +ul.toc {list-style: none} +--> +</style> +<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="../style.css"> + + +</head> + +<body lang="en" bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000" link="#0000FF" vlink="#800080" alink="#FF0000"> + +<a name="Pragmatic"></a> +<header><div id="logo"><img src="../gnu.svg" height="100" width="100"></div><h1>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.</h1></header><section id="main"><a name="Copyleft_003a-Pragmatic-Idealism"></a> +<h1 class="chapter"> 22. Copyleft: Pragmatic Idealism </h1> + +<a name="index-copyleft-_0028see-also-copyright_0029-5"></a> +<p>Every decision a person makes stems from the person’s values and +goals. People can have many different goals and values; fame, profit, +love, survival, fun, and freedom, are just some of the goals that a +good person might have. When the goal is a matter of principle, we +call that idealism. +</p> +<p>My work on free software is motivated by an idealistic goal: spreading +freedom and cooperation. I want +to encourage free software to +spread, replacing proprietary software that forbids cooperation, +and thus make our society better. +</p> +<p>That’s the basic reason why the GNU General Public License is written +the way it is—as a copyleft. +All code added to a GPL-covered program +must be free software, even if it is put in a separate file. I make +my code available for use in free software, and not for use in +proprietary software, in order to encourage other people who write +software to make it free as well. I figure that since proprietary +software developers use copyright to stop us from sharing, we +cooperators can use copyright to give other cooperators an advantage +of their own: they can use our code. +</p> +<p>Not everyone who uses the GNU GPL has this goal. Many years ago, a +friend of mine was asked to rerelease a copylefted program under +noncopyleft terms, and he responded more or less like this: “Sometimes I work on free software, and sometimes I work on proprietary software—but when I work on proprietary software, I expect to get <em>paid.</em>” +</p> +<p>He was willing to share his work with a community that shares +software, but saw no reason to give a handout to a business making +products that would be off-limits to our community. His goal was +different from mine, but he decided that the GNU GPL was useful for +his goal too. +</p> +<p>If you want to accomplish something in the world, idealism is not +enough—you need to choose a method that works to achieve the +goal. In other words, you need to be “pragmatic.” Is the +GPL pragmatic? Let’s look at its results. +</p> +<a name="index-GNU_002c-GCC-3"></a> +<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-C_002b_002b-compiler-1"></a> +<p>Consider GNU C++. Why do we have a free C++ compiler? Only because +the GNU GPL said it had to be free. GNU C++ was developed by an +industry consortium, +<a name="index-MCC"></a> +MCC, starting from the +<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-C-compiler-_0028see-also-GNU_002c-GCC_0029-4"></a> +GNU C compiler. MCC +normally makes its work as proprietary as can be. But they made the +C++ front end free software, because the GNU GPL said that was the +only way they could release it. The C++ front end included many new +files, but since they were meant to be linked with GCC, the GPL +did apply to them. The benefit to our community is evident. +</p> +<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Objective-C"></a> +<p>Consider GNU Objective C. +<a name="index-NeXT"></a> +NeXT initially wanted to make this front +end proprietary; they proposed to release it as ‘<tt>.o</tt>’ files, +and let users link them with the rest of GCC, thinking this might be a +way around the GPL’s requirements. But our lawyer said that this +would not evade the requirements, that it was not allowed. And so +they made the Objective C front end free software. +</p> +<p>Those examples happened years ago, but the GNU GPL continues +to bring us more free software. +</p> +<a name="index-LGPL_002c-and-GNU-libraries-1"></a> +<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-libraries-1"></a> +<a name="index-libraries-_0028comp_002e_0029_002c-GNU-2"></a> +<p>Many GNU libraries are covered by the GNU Lesser General Public +License, but not all. One GNU library which is covered by the +ordinary GNU GPL is +<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Readline-1"></a> +<a name="index-Readline-_0028see-also-both-libraries-_0028comp_002e_0029-and-GNU_0029"></a> +Readline, which implements command-line editing. +I once found out about a nonfree program which was designed +to use Readline, and told the developer this was not allowed. He +could have taken command-line editing out of the program, but what he +actually did was rerelease it under the GPL. Now it is free software. +</p> +<p>The programmers who write improvements to GCC (or +<a name="index-Emacs_002c-GNU-6"></a> +<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Emacs-6"></a> +Emacs, or +<a name="index-BASH-_0028Bourne-Again-Shell_0029_002c-GNU-3"></a> +<a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-BASH-_0028Bourne-Again-Shell_0029-3"></a> +Bash, or +Linux, or any GPL-covered program) are often employed by companies or +universities. When the programmer wants to return his improvements to +the community, and see his code in the next release, the boss may say, +“Hold on there—your code belongs to us! We don’t want to +share it; we have decided to turn your improved version into a +proprietary software product.” +<a name="index-GNU_002c-GCC-4"></a> +</p> +<p>Here the GNU GPL comes to the rescue. The programmer shows the boss +that this proprietary software product would be copyright +infringement, and the boss realizes that he has only two choices: +release the new code as free software, or not at all. Almost always +he lets the programmer do as he intended all along, and the code goes +into the next release. +</p> +<a name="index-GPL-4"></a> +<p>The GNU GPL is not Mr. Nice Guy. It says no to some of +the things that people sometimes want to do. There are users who say +that this is a bad thing—that the GPL “excludes” +some proprietary software developers who “need to be brought +into the free software community.” +</p> +<p>But we are not excluding them from our community; they are choosing +not to enter. Their decision to make software proprietary is a +decision to stay out of our community. Being in our community means +joining in cooperation with us; we cannot “bring them into our +community” if they don’t want to join. +</p> +<p>What we <em>can</em> do is offer them an inducement to join. The GNU +GPL is designed to make an inducement from our existing software: +“If you will make your software free, you can use this +code.” Of course, it won’t win ’em all, but it wins some of the +time. +</p> +<p>Proprietary software development does not contribute to our community, +but its developers often want handouts from us. Free software users +can offer free software developers strokes for the +ego—recognition and gratitude—but it can be very tempting +when a business tells you, “Just let us put your package in our +proprietary program, and your program will be used by many thousands +of people!” The temptation can be powerful, but in the long run +we are all better off if we resist it. +</p> +<p>The temptation and pressure are harder to recognize when they come +indirectly, through free software organizations that have adopted a +policy of catering to proprietary software. The +<a name="index-X-Consortium-_0028see-also-Open-Group_002c-its-successor_0029-2"></a> +X Consortium (and its +successor, the +<a name="index-Open-Group-_0028see-also-X-Consortium_002c-its-precursor_0029"></a> +Open Group) offers an example: funded by companies that +made proprietary software, they strived for a decade to persuade +programmers not to use copyleft. When the Open Group tried to make +<a name="index-X11R6_002e4"></a> +X11R6.4 nonfree software, those +of us who had resisted that pressure were glad that we did. +</p> +<p>In September 1998, several months after X11R6.4 was released with +nonfree distribution terms, the Open Group reversed its decision and +rereleased it under the same noncopyleft free software license that +was used for X11R6.3. Thank you, Open Group—but this subsequent +reversal does not invalidate the conclusions we draw from the fact +that adding the restrictions was <em>possible.</em> +<a name="index-Open-Group-_0028see-also-X-Consortium_002c-its-precursor_0029-1"></a> +</p> +<a name="index-call-to-action_002c-use-copyleft"></a> +<p>Pragmatically speaking, thinking about greater long-term goals will +strengthen your will to resist this pressure. If you focus your mind +on the freedom and community that you can build by staying firm, you +will find the strength to do it. “Stand for something, or you +will fall for anything.” +</p> +<p>And if cynics ridicule freedom, ridicule community…if +“hard-nosed realists” say that profit is the only +ideal…just ignore them, and use copyleft all the same. +<a name="index-copyleft-_0028see-also-copyright_0029-6"></a> +</p> +</body> +</html> |