diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/rms-kol.html')
-rw-r--r-- | talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/rms-kol.html | 235 |
1 files changed, 235 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/rms-kol.html b/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/rms-kol.html new file mode 100644 index 0000000..fa95109 --- /dev/null +++ b/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/rms-kol.html @@ -0,0 +1,235 @@ +<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" --> +<!-- Parent-Version: 1.90 --> +<title>Richard Stallman's speech in Kolkata (Calcutta), August 2006 +- GNU Project - Free Software Foundation</title> + +<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/rms-kol.translist" --> +<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" --> + +<h2>Richard Stallman's speech in Kolkata (Calcutta), August 2006</h2> + +<p>by <strong>Richard Stallman</strong></p> + +<p>There are a number of reasons why I'm not a communist. The first of +them is that I'm not against the idea of private business, as long as +it does not oppose people's human rights and the interests of +society. Business is legitimate as long as it treats the rest of +society decently.</p> + +<p>Computing is a new area of human life. So we have to think about +the human rights associated with this. What are the human rights +software users are entitled to? Four freedoms define Free Software. A +programme is Free Software for a user if:</p> + +<ul> + <li>Freedom 0: Run the software as you wish.</li> + <li>Freedom 1: Share the source code and change it.</li> + <li>Freedom 2: Help your neighbour and distribute and publish.</li> + <li>Freedom 3: Help your community and distribute your modified + versions.</li> +</ul> + +<p>With these 4 Freedoms, you can live an upright life with your +community. If you use nonfree, proprietary software, the developer +has the power to decide what you can do. He can use that power over +you. Like Microsoft. That game is evil. Nobody should play it. So it's +not a question of beating Microsoft at its game. I set out to get away +from that game.</p> + +<p>Once GNU-Linux was ready in 1992, it began to catch on. It was +reliable, powerful, cheap and flexible. Thousands and millions of +people began to use GNU-Linux. But the ideals of freedom began to be +forgotten though. In 1998, people stopped talking about Free +Software. Instead they said “open source”. That was a way +of not saying “free” and not mentioning the ideas behind +it. I don't disagree with that, but that's not what I am interested +in. What I'm really interested in most of all is to teach people to +value their freedoms and to fight for them. In software, as in the US, +our freedom is threatened. So the basic things we need to do are: +remember our freedom frequently, value it and insist on it. When +someone says they protect me from terrorism by taking away my +freedom—say No! Similarly, with software that threatens our +freedom, that might give us some temporary comparative +advantage—we should say No!</p> + +<p>West Bengal should not follow the world trend. It should stand up +for freedom. That's different. No! I'm not going to let the world lead +me where it wants to go. I'm going where freedom is. If you're going +elsewhere—I'm not going there. It requires firmness, it requires +a decision that says freedom matters and hence it must be promoted. +Even if that's inconvenient. Freedom needs some sacrifices, some +inconvenience, some price. But it's a small price to pay.</p> + +<p>By globalisation, people usually mean globalisation of the power of +business. Business should not have political power. Otherwise +democracy becomes sick. And with globalisation of business power, this +political power is enhanced. Free trade treaties are designed to +attack democracy. For instance, it explicitly allows any business to +sue government if a law makes its profit less than it has been. +Companies have to be paid for the permission to do anything of social +or environmental importance. Not all free trade treaties do this +explicitly. They do it implicitly. Companies can threaten to move away +elsewhere. And they do use this threat. +<span class="gnun-split"></span>This actually happened some +years ago, with the EU software patents. The govt of Denmark was +threatened that if they did not support this the company would move +the business elsewhere. This tiny threat was sufficient to blackmail +the govt of Denmark. If you allow a foreign mega-corporation to buy a +domestic corporation, you are allowing it to buy a weapon pointed +against your country. The environment, public health, general +standards of living—are all important, and free trade treaties +should be abolished. They are harmful to freedom, health and the lives +of people.</p> + +<p>I do not accept the term “intellectual property”. The +very term is biased and confusing. It talks about useful techniques +and works. It presumes they are “property”. It prejudges +such questions. There's also a more subtle problem. It lumps together +all the diverse things and makes it look like you can talk about all +of them together. Copyright, patents, trade laws—are all very +different. It takes the greatest efforts of the best scholars to +overcome the confusion caused by the term “intellectual +property” and to discuss the details of these individual +items. +<span class="gnun-split"></span>The <abbr title="General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade"> +GATT</abbr> Treaty and the <abbr title="Trade-Related Aspects of +Intellectual Property Rights">TRIPS</abbr>—actually it should be +called Trade-related Impediments to Education and Science. Free trade +and enhancement of world trade harms democracy. When you globalise +something evil, it becomes a greater evil. And when you globalise +something good, it becomes a greater good. Human knowledge and +cooperation are such “goods”. The Free Software Movement +is a part of that. It is the globalisation of one area of human +knowledge, namely software. Through global cooperation like this, you +get freedom and independence for every region and every country.</p> + +<p>Proprietary software is a colonial system. It's electronic +colonialism. And not by a country, but by a corporation. Electronic +colonial powers keep people divided and helpless. Look at the end-user +licensing agreement. You don't have the source code, you are +helpless. You can't share, and so you are kept divided. National +colonial powers recruit local elites and pay them and keep them above +the rest of the people, working for the colonial masters. Today we see +electronic colonial powers recruit native zamindars to keep the system +intact. Microsoft sets up a research facility and in exchange it keeps +its grip firmly on everyone else. Govts and schools are in their +grip. They know how to do this. They know how to buy govt support. But +what's the govt buying? Dependency, not development. Only Free +Software constitutes development. It enables any activity to be fully +under the control of the people doing it. Free Software is appropriate +technology. Proprietary software is not appropriate for any use.</p> + +<p>The West Bengal govt has an opportunity to adopt a policy of firm +leadership in this regard. This will give a boost to human resource +development. Free Software respects people's freedom. Govt has an +influence on the future of society. Choosing which software to teach +students: if you teach them Windows, they will be Windows users. For +something else, they need to learn, and make the effort to learn +something else. Microsoft knows this. So it donates Windows to +schools. Addiction (through using unauthorised software use) only +helps them. They didn't want to leave anything to choice, so they give +Windows free to schools. Like injecting a dose. The first dose is +gratis. Afterwards it's not gratis, either for them or their +employers. This is a way to impose their power on the rest of society +and its future. Schools have a mission to society. This mission +requires teaching students to live in freedom, teaching skills to make +it easy to live in freedom. This means using Free Software.</p> + +<p>Free Software is good for computer science education, to maximise +the potential of natural programmers. It gives students the +opportunity to really learn. It's good for the natural programmers. If +you have proprietary software, the teacher says “I don't +know”, “You are not allowed to know, it's a secret.” +So the alternative is to give him the source codes and let him read it +all. They will then learn to be really good programmers. +<span class="gnun-split"></span>But the most +crucial reason is for the sake of moral education. Teaching them to be +good corporations and benevolent, helpful citizens. This has to be +taught. School has to teach by example. If you bring software to +class, you must share this with other kids. Or don't bring it. Schools +must follow their own rule, by bringing Free Software to class. +Schools should use 100% Free Software. No proprietary software should +be used in schools. Public agencies, after a migration period, should +use Free Software. All software development must run on Free Software +platforms. And if it's released to the public, it must be Free +Software. (Free: as in free speech, not free beer.)</p> + +<p>One easy and useful way to put Free Software in schools—is to +participate in the “1 Laptop per Child” programme. India +recently pulled out of this programme, I'm told. I'm told the Indian +govt is making lots of laws to make multinational corporations +happy. Maybe this was to make Microsoft happy. Even if India is not, +West Bengal can participate in the 1 Laptop per child programme. I can +put them in touch with the people developing that machine.</p> + +<p>The Govt of India is considering a vicious new copyright law, +imitating US law, in favour of large businesses, and against its +citizens. The only emergency I can see that requires this being rushed +through is catastrophic shortfall in the dream profits of some +businesses! Foreigners should not have political power. In my case, I +don't.</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 © 2006, 2019 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: 2019/12/30 11:28:30 $ +<!-- timestamp end --> +</p> +</div> +</div> +</body> +</html> |