diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/scrap1_10.html')
-rw-r--r-- | talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/scrap1_10.html | 243 |
1 files changed, 243 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/scrap1_10.html b/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/scrap1_10.html new file mode 100644 index 0000000..6b36f2d --- /dev/null +++ b/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/scrap1_10.html @@ -0,0 +1,243 @@ +<!-- 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. + --> + + + <a name="Selling-Free-Software"> + </a> + <h1 class="chapter"> + 10. Selling Free Software + </h1> + <a name="index-selling_002c-free-software-2"> + </a> + <p> + Many people believe that the spirit of the + <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Project-4"> + </a> + GNU Project is that you +should not charge money for distributing copies of software, or that +you should charge as little as possible—just enough to cover +the cost. This is a misunderstanding. + </p> + <p> + Actually, we encourage people who redistribute free software +to charge as much as they wish or can. If this seems surprising to +you, please read on. + </p> + <p> + The word “free” has two legitimate general meanings; it can refer +either to freedom or to price. When we speak of “free software,” +we’re talking about freedom, not price. (Think of “free speech,” +not “free beer.”) Specifically, it means that a user is free to run +the program, change the program, and redistribute the program with or +without changes. + </p> + <p> + Free programs are sometimes distributed gratis, and sometimes for a +substantial price. Often the same program is available in both ways +from different places. The program is free regardless of the price, +because users have freedom in using it. + </p> + <p> + Nonfree programs are usually sold for a high price, but sometimes a store will give you a copy at no charge. That doesn’t make it free software, though. Price or no price, the program is nonfree because users don’t have freedom. + </p> + <p> + Since free software is not a matter of price, a low price doesn’t make +the software +free, or even closer to free. So if you are redistributing copies of free +software, you might as well charge a substantial fee and + <em> + make +some money. + </em> + Redistributing free software is a good and +legitimate activity; if you do it, you might as well make a profit +from it. + </p> + <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-raise-funds"> + </a> + <a name="index-development_002c-fundraising-1"> + </a> + <p> + Free software is a community project, and everyone who depends on it +ought to look for ways to contribute to building the community. For a +distributor, the way to do this is to give a part of the profit to free software development projects or to the + <a name="index-FSF_002c-how-you-can-help-3"> + </a> + <a name="index-development_002c-fundraising-2"> + </a> + <a name="index-development_002c-contributions-and-donations-2"> + </a> + Free Software Foundation. This way you can +advance the world of free software. + </p> + <p> + <em> + Distributing free software is an opportunity to raise funds for development. Don’t waste it! + </em> + </p> + <p> + In order to contribute funds, you need to have some extra. If you +charge too low a fee, you won’t have anything to spare to support +development. + </p> + <a name="Will-a-Higher-Distribution-Price-Hurt-Some-Users_003f"> + </a> + <h3 class="subheading"> + Will a Higher Distribution Price Hurt Some Users? + </h3> + <p> + People sometimes worry that a high distribution fee will put free +software out of range for users who don’t have a lot of money. With +proprietary software, a high price does exactly that—but free software +is different. + </p> + <p> + The difference is that free software naturally tends to spread around, +and there are many ways to get it. + </p> + <p> + Software hoarders try their damnedest to stop you from running a +proprietary program without paying the standard price. If this price +is high, that does make it hard for some users to use the program. + </p> + <p> + With free software, users don’t + <em> + have + </em> + to pay the +distribution fee in order to use the software. They can copy the +program from a friend who has a copy, or with the help of a friend who +has network access. Or several users can join together, split the +price of one CD-ROM, then each in turn can install the software. A high +CD-ROM price is not a major obstacle when the software is free. + </p> + <a name="Will-a-Higher-Distribution-Price-Discourage-Use-of-Free-Software_003f"> + </a> + <h3 class="subheading"> + Will a Higher Distribution Price Discourage Use of Free Software? + </h3> + <a name="index-selling_002c-and-distribution-fees"> + </a> + <p> + Another common concern is for the popularity of free software. People +think that a high price for distribution would reduce the number of +users, or that a low price is likely to encourage users. + </p> + <p> + This is true for proprietary software—but free software is +different. With so many ways to get copies, the price of distribution +service has less effect on popularity. + </p> + <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-develop-more-free-software"> + </a> + <p> + In the long run, how many people use free software is determined +mainly by + <em> + how much free software can do, + </em> + and how easy it +is to use. Many users do not make freedom their priority; they +may continue to use proprietary software if +free software can’t do all the jobs they want done. Thus, if we want +to increase the number of users in the long run, we should above all + <em> + develop more free software. + </em> + </p> + <a name="index-manuals_002c-need-for-2"> + </a> + <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-write-free-documentation"> + </a> + <p> + The most direct way to do this is by writing needed +free software or manuals yourself. But if you do +distribution rather than writing, the best way you can help is by + <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-raise-funds-1"> + </a> + raising funds for others to write them. + </p> + <a name="The-Term-_0060_0060Selling-Software_0027_0027-Can-Be-Confusing-Too"> + </a> + <h3 class="subheading"> + The Term “Selling Software” Can Be Confusing Too + </h3> + <p> + Strictly speaking, “selling” means trading goods for +money. Selling a copy of a free program is legitimate, and we +encourage it. + </p> + <p> + However, when people think of “selling software,” +they usually imagine doing it the way most companies do it: making the +software proprietary rather than free. + </p> + <p> + So unless you’re going to draw distinctions carefully, the way this +article does, we suggest it is better to avoid using the term +“selling software” and choose some other wording instead. +For example, you could say “distributing free software for a +fee”—that is unambiguous. + </p> + <a name="High-or-Low-Fees_002c-and-the-GNU-GPL"> + </a> + <h3 class="subheading"> + High or Low Fees, and the GNU GPL + </h3> + <a name="index-GPL_002c-high-or-low-fees-and"> + </a> + <p> + Except for one special situation, the GNU General Public License (GNU GPL) +has no requirements about how much you can charge for distributing a +copy of free software. You can charge nothing, a penny, a dollar, or +a billion dollars. It’s up to you, and the marketplace, so don’t +complain to us if nobody wants to pay a billion dollars for a +copy. + </p> + <p> + The one exception is in the case where binaries are distributed +without the corresponding complete source code. Those who do this are +required by the GNU GPL to provide source code on subsequent request. +Without a limit on the fee for the source code, they would be able set +a fee too large for anyone to pay—such as a billion +dollars—and thus pretend to release source code while in truth +concealing it. So in this case we have to limit the fee for source in order +to ensure the user’s freedom. In ordinary situations, however, there +is no such justification for limiting distribution fees, so we do not +limit them. + </p> + <p> + Sometimes companies whose activities cross the line stated in the GNU +GPL plead for permission, saying that they “won’t charge +money for the GNU software” or such like. That won’t get them anywhere +with us. Free software is about freedom, and enforcing the GPL is +defending freedom. When we defend users’ freedom, we are not +distracted by side issues such as how much of a distribution fee is +charged. Freedom is the issue, the whole issue, and the only issue. + <a name="index-selling_002c-free-software-3"> + </a> + <a name="index-selling_002c-and-distribution-fees-1"> + </a> + </p> + <hr size="2"/> + |