1 files changed, 154 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/scrap1_39.html b/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/scrap1_39.html
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..a12352d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/scrap1_39.html
@@ -0,0 +1,154 @@
+<!-- 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="Thank-You_002c-Larry-McVoy">
+ </a>
+ <h1 class="chapter">
+  39. Thank You, Larry McVoy
+ </h1>
+ <a name="index-McVoy_002c-Larry">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-nonfree-software_002c-danger-of">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+  For the first time in my life, I want to thank Larry McVoy. He
+recently eliminated a major weakness of the free software community,
+by announcing the end of his campaign to entice free software projects
+to use and promote his nonfree software. Soon, Linux development
+will no longer use this program, and no longer spread the message that
+nonfree software is a good thing if it’s convenient.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+  My gratitude is limited, since it was McVoy that created the problem
+in the first place. But I still appreciate his decision to clear it
+up.
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-BitKeeper">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+  There are thousands of nonfree programs, and most merit no special
+attention, other than developing a free replacement. What made this
+program, BitKeeper, infamous and dangerous was its marketing approach:
+inviting high-profile free software projects to use it, so as to
+attract other paying users.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+  McVoy made the program available gratis to free software developers.
+This did not mean it was free software for them: they were privileged
+not to part with their money, but they still had to part with their
+freedom. They gave up the fundamental freedoms that define free
+software: freedom to run the program as you wish for any purpose,
+freedom to study and change the source code as you wish, freedom to
+make and redistribute copies, and freedom to publish modified
+versions.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+  The free software movement has said, “Think of ‘free speech,’ not
+‘free beer’” since 1990. McVoy said the opposite; he invited
+developers to focus on the lack of monetary price, instead of on
+freedom. A free software activist would dismiss this suggestion, but
+those in our community who value technical advantage above freedom and
+community were susceptible to it.
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-Linux-kernel-5">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-kernel_002c-Linux-5">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+  McVoy’s great triumph was the adoption of this program for Linux
+development. No free software project is more visible than Linux. It
+is the kernel of the GNU/Linux operating system, an essential
+component, and users often mistake it for the entire system. As McVoy
+surely planned, the use of his program in Linux development was
+powerful publicity for it.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+  It was also, whether intentionally or not, a powerful political PR
+campaign, telling the free software community that freedom-denying
+software is acceptable as long as it’s convenient. If we had taken
+that attitude towards Unix in 1984, where would we be today? Nowhere.
+If we had accepted using Unix, instead of setting out to replace it,
+nothing like the GNU/Linux system would exist.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+  Of course, the Linux developers had practical reasons for what they
+did. I won’t argue with those reasons; they surely know what’s
+convenient for them. But they did not count, or did not value, how
+this would affect their freedom—or the rest of the community’s
+efforts.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+  A free kernel, even a whole free operating system, is not sufficient
+to use your computer in freedom; we need free software for everything
+else, too. Free applications, free drivers, free BIOS: some of those
+projects face large obstacles—the need to reverse engineer
+formats or protocols or pressure companies to document them, or to
+work around or face down patent threats, or to compete with a network
+effect. Success will require firmness and determination. A better
+kernel is desirable, to be sure, but not at the expense of weakening
+the impetus to liberate the rest of the software world.
+  <a name="index-Linux-kernel-6">
+  </a>
+  <a name="index-kernel_002c-Linux-6">
+  </a>
+ </p>
+ <p>
+  When the use of his program became controversial, McVoy responded with
+distraction. For instance, he promised to release it as free software
+if the company went out of business. Alas, that does no good as long
+as the company remains in business. Linux developers responded by
+saying, “We’ll switch to a free program when you develop a
+better one.” This was an indirect way of saying, “We made
+the mess, but we won’t clean it up.”
+ </p>
+ <p>
+  Fortunately, not everyone in Linux development considered a nonfree
+program acceptable, and there was continuing pressure for a free
+alternative. Finally
+  <a name="index-Tridgell_002c-Andrew">
+  </a>
+  Andrew Tridgell developed an interoperating free
+program, so Linux developers would no longer need to use a nonfree
+program.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+  McVoy first blustered and threatened, but ultimately chose to go home
+and take his ball with him: he withdrew permission for gratis use by
+free software projects, and Linux developers will move to other
+software. The program they no longer use will remain unethical as
+long as it is nonfree, but they will no longer promote it, nor by
+using it teach others to give freedom low priority. We can begin to
+forget about that program.
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-beware-of-nonfree-programs">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+  We should not forget the lesson we have learned from it: Nonfree
+programs are dangerous to you and to your community. Don’t let them
+get a place in your life.
+  <a name="index-McVoy_002c-Larry-1">
+  </a>
+  <a name="index-nonfree-software_002c-danger-of-1">
+  </a>
+ </p>
+