summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/x.html
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat (limited to 'talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/x.html')
-rw-r--r--talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/x.html221
1 files changed, 221 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/x.html b/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/x.html
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..13db816
--- /dev/null
+++ b/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/x.html
@@ -0,0 +1,221 @@
+<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" -->
+<!-- Parent-Version: 1.77 -->
+<title>The X Window System Trap
+- GNU Project - Free Software Foundation</title>
+<meta http-equiv="Keywords"
+ content="GNU, FSF, Free Software Foundation, freedom, Richard Stallman, rms, free software movement" />
+<meta http-equiv="Description"
+ content="Richard Stallman discusses the history of the movement to develop a free operating system." />
+
+<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/x.translist" -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" -->
+<div class="reduced-width">
+<h2>The X Window System Trap</h2>
+
+<address class="byline">by Richard M. Stallman</address>
+<hr class="thin" />
+<div class="article">
+<p>
+To copyleft or not to copyleft? That is one of the major
+controversies in the free software community. The idea of copyleft is
+that we should fight fire with fire&mdash;that we should use copyright
+to make sure our code stays free. The GNU General Public License (GNU
+GPL) is one example of a copyleft license.</p>
+
+<p>
+Some free software developers prefer noncopyleft distribution.
+Noncopyleft licenses such as the XFree86 and
+<a href="/licenses/bsd.html">BSD</a> licenses are based on the idea
+of never saying no to anyone&mdash;not even to someone who seeks to
+use your work as the basis for restricting other people. Noncopyleft
+licensing does nothing wrong, but it misses the opportunity to
+actively protect our freedom to change and redistribute software. For
+that, we need copyleft.</p>
+
+<p>
+For many years, the X Consortium was the chief opponent of copyleft.
+It exerted both moral suasion and pressure to discourage free software
+developers from copylefting their programs. It used moral suasion by
+suggesting that it is not nice to say no. It used pressure through
+its rule that copylefted software could not be in the X Distribution.</p>
+
+<p>
+Why did the X Consortium adopt this policy? It had to do with their
+conception of success. The X Consortium defined success as
+popularity&mdash;specifically, getting computer companies to use the X
+Window System. This definition put the computer companies in the
+driver's seat: whatever they wanted, the X Consortium had to help
+them get it.</p>
+
+<p>
+Computer companies normally distribute proprietary software. They
+wanted free software developers to donate their work for such use. If
+they had asked for this directly, people would have laughed. But the
+X Consortium, fronting for them, could present this request as an
+unselfish one. &ldquo;Join us in donating our work to proprietary software
+developers,&rdquo; they said, suggesting that this is a noble form of
+self-sacrifice. &ldquo;Join us in achieving popularity,&rdquo; they said,
+suggesting that it was not even a sacrifice.</p>
+
+<p>
+But self-sacrifice is not the issue: tossing away the defense that
+copyleft provides, which protects the freedom of the whole community,
+is sacrificing more than yourself. Those who granted the X
+Consortium's request entrusted the community's future to the goodwill
+of the X Consortium.</p>
+
+<p>
+This trust was misplaced. In its last year, the X Consortium made a
+plan to restrict the forthcoming X11R6.4 release so that it would not
+be free software. They decided to start saying no, not only to
+proprietary software developers, but to our community as well.</p>
+
+<p>
+There is an irony here. If you said yes when the X Consortium asked
+you not to use copyleft, you put the X Consortium in a position to
+license and restrict its version of your program, along with the
+code for the core of X.</p>
+
+<p>
+The X Consortium did not carry out this plan. Instead it closed down
+and transferred X development to the Open Group, whose staff are now
+carrying out a similar plan. To give them credit, when I asked them
+to release X11R6.4 under the GNU GPL in parallel with their planned
+restrictive license, they were willing to consider the idea. (They
+were firmly against staying with the old X11 distribution terms.)
+Before they said yes or no to this proposal, it had already failed for
+another reason: the XFree86 group followed the X Consortium's old
+policy, and will not accept copylefted software.
+</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. Thus, the Open Group therefore eventually did
+what was right, but that does not alter the general issue.</p>
+
+<p>
+Even if the X Consortium and the Open Group had never planned to
+restrict X, someone else could have done it. Noncopylefted software
+is vulnerable from all directions; it lets anyone make a nonfree
+version dominant, if he will invest sufficient resources to add
+significantly important features using proprietary code. Users who
+choose software based on technical characteristics, rather than on
+freedom, could easily be lured to the nonfree version for short-term
+convenience.</p>
+
+<p>
+The X Consortium and Open Group can no longer exert moral suasion by
+saying that it is wrong to say no. This will make it easier to decide
+to copyleft your X-related software.</p>
+
+<p>
+When you work on the core of X, on programs such as the X server,
+Xlib, and Xt, there is a practical reason not to use copyleft. The
+X.org group does an important job for the community in maintaining
+these programs, and the benefit of copylefting our changes would be
+less than the harm done by a fork in development. So it is better to
+work with them, and not copyleft our changes on these programs.
+Likewise for utilities such as <code>xset</code> and <code>xrdb</code>,
+which are close to the
+core of X and do not need major improvements. At least we know that
+the X.org group has a firm commitment to developing these programs as
+free software.</p>
+
+<p>
+The issue is different for programs outside the core of X:
+applications, window managers, and additional libraries and widgets.
+There is no reason not to copyleft them, and we should copyleft them.</p>
+
+<p>
+In case anyone feels the pressure exerted by the criteria for
+inclusion in the X distributions, the GNU Project will undertake to
+publicize copylefted packages that work with X. If you would like to
+copyleft something, and you worry that its omission from the X
+distribution will impede its popularity, please ask us to help.</p>
+
+<p>
+At the same time, it is better if we do not feel too much need for
+popularity. When a businessman tempts you with &ldquo;more
+popularity,&rdquo; he may try to convince you that his use of your
+program is crucial to its success. Don't believe it! If your program
+is good, it will find many users anyway; you don't need to feel
+desperate for any particular users, and you will be stronger if you do
+not. You can get an indescribable sense of joy and freedom by
+responding, &ldquo;Take it or leave it&mdash;that's no skin off my
+back.&rdquo; Often the businessman will turn around and accept the
+program with copyleft, once you call the bluff.</p>
+
+<p>
+Friends, free software developers, don't repeat old mistakes! If we
+do not copyleft our software, we put its future at the mercy of anyone
+equipped with more resources than scruples. With copyleft, we can
+defend freedom, not just for ourselves, but for our whole
+community.</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+</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 &amp; GNU inquiries to
+<a href="mailto:gnu@gnu.org">&lt;gnu@gnu.org&gt;</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">&lt;webmasters@gnu.org&gt;</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">
+ &lt;web-translators@gnu.org&gt;</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 &copy; 1998, 1999, 2009, 2015, 2020 Richard M. 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: 2020/10/06 08:00:33 $
+<!-- timestamp end -->
+</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+</body>
+</html>