diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/bill-gates-and-other-communists.html')
-rw-r--r-- | talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/bill-gates-and-other-communists.html | 176 |
1 files changed, 176 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/bill-gates-and-other-communists.html b/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/bill-gates-and-other-communists.html new file mode 100644 index 0000000..df18cee --- /dev/null +++ b/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/bill-gates-and-other-communists.html @@ -0,0 +1,176 @@ +<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" --> +<!-- Parent-Version: 1.78 --> +<title>Bill Gates and Other Communists +- GNU Project - Free Software Foundation</title> + <!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/bill-gates-and-other-communists.translist" --> +<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" --> +<h2>Bill Gates and Other Communists</h2> + +<p>by Richard Stallman</p> + +<blockquote> +<p>Originally published in 2005 in +<a href="http://cnet.com/au/news/bill-gates-and-other-communists/">CNET +News.com</a>.</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>Bill Gates discussed patents with CNET under the heading of +“<a href="/philosophy/not-ipr.html">intellectual +property</a>,” a term that covers many disparate +laws. He said anyone who won't give blanket support to all these laws +is a Communist. Since I'm not a Communist but I have criticized +software patents, I got to thinking this calumny might be aimed at +me.</p> + +<p>The term “intellectual property” is too broad to have +one opinion about. It lumps together copyright law, patent law, and +various other laws, whose requirements and effects are entirely +different. So anyone using the term “intellectual +property” is typically either confused himself, or trying to +confuse you. Why does Mr. Gates lump these issues together? Let's +study the differences he sets aside.</p> + +<p>Software developers are not up in arms against copyright law, +because the developer of a program holds the copyright on the program; +as long as the programmers wrote the code themselves, no one else has +a copyright on their code. There is no danger that strangers could +have a valid case of copyright infringement against them.</p> + +<p>Patents are a different story. Software patents don't cover +programs or code; they cover ideas (methods, techniques, features, +algorithms, etc.). Developing a large program entails combining +thousands of ideas, and even if a few of them are new, the rest must +necessarily have come from other sources, such as programs the +developer has seen. If each of these ideas could be patented by +someone, every large program is likely to infringe hundreds of +patents. Developing a large program means laying oneself open to +hundreds of potential lawsuits. Software patents are a menace to +software developers, and to the users. Since patent law covers +execution of the program, the users can also be sued.</p> + +<p>A few fortunate software developers avoid most of the danger. +These are the megacorporations, which typically have thousands of +patents each, and cross-license with each other. This gives them an +advantage over smaller rivals not in a position to do likewise. +That's why it is generally the megacorporations that lobby for +software patents.</p> + +<p>Today's Microsoft is a megacorporation with thousands of patents. +Microsoft said in court that the main competition for MS Windows is +“Linux,” meaning the free software GNU/Linux operating +system. Leaked internal documents say that Microsoft aims to use +software patents to stop the development of GNU/Linux.</p> + +<p>When Mr. Gates started hyping his solution to the problem of spam, +I suspected this was a plan to use patents to grab control of the net. +Sure enough, in 2004 Microsoft asked the IETF to approve a mail +protocol that Microsoft was trying to patent. The patent license +policy for this protocol was written to forbid free software entirely. +No program supporting this mail protocol could be released as free +software—not under the GNU GPL, or the MPL, or the Apache +license, or any other.</p> + +<p>The IETF rejected Microsoft's protocol, but Microsoft said it would +try to convince major ISPs to use it anyway. Thanks to Mr. Gates, we +now know that an open Internet with protocols anyone can implement is +Communism; it was set up by that famous Communist agent, the US +Department of Defense.</p> + +<p>With Microsoft's market clout, it can impose its choice of +programming system as a de-facto standard. Microsoft has already +patented some .NET implementation methods, raising the concern that +millions of users have been shifted to a government-issued Microsoft +monopoly.</p> + +<p>But Capitalism means monopoly; at least, Gates-style Capitalism +does. People who think that everyone should be free to program, free +to write complex software, they are Communists, says Mr. Gates. But +these Communists have infiltrated even the Microsoft boardroom. +Here's what Bill Gates told Microsoft employees in 1991:</p> + +<blockquote> +<p>“If people had understood how patents would be granted when +most of today's ideas were invented and had taken out patents, the +industry would be at a complete stand-still today...A future start-up +with no patents of its own will be forced to pay whatever price the +giants choose to impose.”</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>Mr. Gates' secret is out now—he too was a +“Communist,” he too recognized that software patents were +harmful, until Microsoft became one of these giants. Now Microsoft +aims to use software patents to impose whatever price it chooses on +you and me. And if we object, Mr. Gates will call us +“Communists.”</p> + +<p>If you're not afraid of name calling, visit the +<a href="https://ffii.org"> Foundation for a Free Information +Infrastructure</a>, and join the fight against software patents in +Europe. We persuaded the European Parliament once—we even got +support from right-wing MEPs—and with your help we will do it +again.</p> + +</div><!-- for id="content", starts in the include above --> +<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" --> +<div id="footer"> +<div class="unprintable"> + +<p>Please send general FSF & GNU inquiries to +<a href="mailto:gnu@gnu.org"><gnu@gnu.org></a>. +There are also <a href="/contact/">other ways to contact</a> +the FSF. Broken links and other corrections or suggestions can be sent +to <a href="mailto:webmasters@gnu.org"><webmasters@gnu.org></a>.</p> + +<p><!-- TRANSLATORS: Ignore the original text in this paragraph, + replace it with the translation of these two: + + We work hard and do our best to provide accurate, good quality + translations. However, we are not exempt from imperfection. + Please send your comments and general suggestions in this regard + to <a href="mailto:web-translators@gnu.org"> + <web-translators@gnu.org></a>.</p> + + <p>For information on coordinating and submitting translations of + our web pages, see <a + href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations + README</a>. --> +Please see the <a +href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations +README</a> for information on coordinating and submitting translations +of this article.</p> +</div> + +<!-- Regarding copyright, in general, standalone pages (as opposed to + files generated as part of manuals) on the GNU web server should + be under CC BY-ND 4.0. Please do NOT change or remove this + without talking with the webmasters or licensing team first. + Please make sure the copyright date is consistent with the + document. For web pages, it is ok to list just the latest year the + document was modified, or published. + + If you wish to list earlier years, that is ok too. + Either "2001, 2002, 2003" or "2001-2003" are ok for specifying + years, as long as each year in the range is in fact a copyrightable + year, i.e., a year in which the document was published (including + being publicly visible on the web or in a revision control system). + + There is more detail about copyright years in the GNU Maintainers + Information document, www.gnu.org/prep/maintain. --> + +<p>Copyright © 2005, 2015 Richard Stallman</p> + +<p>This page is licensed under a <a rel="license" +href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">Creative +Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.</p> + +<!--#include virtual="/server/bottom-notes.html" --> + +<p class="unprintable">Updated: +<!-- timestamp start --> +$Date: 2015/10/06 13:43:20 $ +<!-- timestamp end --> +</p> +</div> +</div> +</body> +</html> |