diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/scrap1_4.html')
-rw-r--r-- | talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/scrap1_4.html | 1032 |
1 files changed, 1032 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/scrap1_4.html b/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/scrap1_4.html new file mode 100644 index 0000000..a1caeaf --- /dev/null +++ b/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/scrap1_4.html @@ -0,0 +1,1032 @@ +<!-- 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="The-GNU-Manifesto"> + </a> + <h1 class="chapter"> + 4. The GNU Manifesto + </h1> + <a name="index-GNU_002c-_0060_0060GNU-Manifesto_0027_0027"> + </a> + <a name="index-_0060_0060GNU-Manifesto_0027_0027"> + </a> + <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Project-2"> + </a> + <blockquote class="smallquotation"> + <p> + The GNU Manifesto was written by Richard Stallman at the beginning of +the GNU Project, to ask for participation and support. For the first +few years, it was updated in minor ways to account for developments, +but now it seems best to leave it unchanged as most people have seen +it. + <br/> + </p> + <p> + Since that time, we have learned about certain common misunderstandings +that different wording could help avoid. Footnotes added since 1993 help +clarify these points. + <br/> + </p> + <p> + For up-to-date information about the available GNU software, please +see the information available on our web server, in particular our +list of software. For how to contribute, see + <a href="http://gnu.org/help"> + http://gnu.org/help + </a> + . + </p> + </blockquote> + <a name="What_0027s-GNU_003f-Gnu_0027s-Not-Unix_0021"> + </a> + <h3 class="subheading"> + What’s GNU? Gnu’s Not Unix! + </h3> + <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-software-_0028see-also-software_0029-1"> + </a> + <a name="index-Unix-compatibility_002c-announcement-of-1"> + </a> + <p> + GNU, which stands for Gnu’s Not Unix, is the name for the complete +Unix-compatible software system which I am writing so that I can give +it away free to everyone who can use it. + <a href="#FOOT12" name="DOCF12"> + (12) + </a> + Several other volunteers are helping me. Contributions +of time, money, programs and equipment are greatly needed. + </p> + <a name="index-GNU_002c-operating-system-parts-4"> + </a> + <p> + So far we have an + <a name="index-Emacs_002c-GNU-4"> + </a> + <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Emacs-4"> + </a> + Emacs text editor with Lisp for writing editor +commands, a source level debugger, a + <a name="index-yacc-1"> + </a> + yacc-compatible parser generator, +a linker, and around 35 utilities. A shell (command interpreter) is +nearly completed. A new portable optimizing C compiler has compiled +itself and may be released this year. An initial kernel exists but +many more features are needed to emulate Unix. When the kernel and +compiler are finished, it will be possible to distribute a GNU system +suitable for program development. We will use + <a name="index-TeX-1"> + </a> + TeX as our text +formatter, but an + <a name="index-nroff"> + </a> + nroff is being worked on. We will use the free, +portable X window system as well. After this we will add a portable + <a name="index-Common-Lisp"> + </a> + <a name="index-Lisp_002c-Common"> + </a> + <a name="index-Empire-game-1"> + </a> + <a name="index-games_002c-Empire-1"> + </a> + Common Lisp, an Empire game, a spreadsheet, and hundreds of other +things, plus online documentation. We hope to supply, eventually, +everything useful that normally comes with a Unix system, and more. + </p> + <p> + GNU will be able to run Unix programs, but will not be identical to +Unix. We will make all improvements that are convenient, based on our +experience with other operating systems. In particular, we plan to +have longer file names, file version numbers, a crashproof file system, +file name completion perhaps, terminal-independent display support, and +perhaps eventually a Lisp-based window system through which several +Lisp programs and ordinary Unix programs can share a screen. Both C +and Lisp will be available as system programming languages. We will +try to support + <a name="index-UUCP-1"> + </a> + UUCP, + <a name="index-MIT_002c-Chaosnet-2"> + </a> + MIT Chaosnet, and Internet protocols for +communication. + </p> + <p> + GNU is aimed initially at machines in the + <a name="index-68000_002dclass-hardware-2"> + </a> + 68000/16000 class with +virtual memory, because they are the easiest machines to make it run +on. The extra effort to make it run on smaller machines will be left +to someone who wants to use it on them. + </p> + <p> + To avoid horrible confusion, please pronounce the + <em> + g + </em> + in the word “GNU” when it is the name of this project. + <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-software-_0028see-also-software_0029-2"> + </a> + </p> + <a name="Why-I-Must-Write-GNU"> + </a> + <h3 class="subheading"> + Why I Must Write GNU + </h3> + <a name="index-GNU_002c-motivation-to-write"> + </a> + <p> + I consider that the + <a name="index-Golden-Rule-1"> + </a> + Golden Rule requires that if I like a program I +must share it with other people who like it. Software sellers want to +divide the users and conquer them, making each user agree not to share +with others. I refuse to break solidarity with other users in this +way. I cannot in good conscience sign a + <a name="index-nondisclosure-agreements-4"> + </a> + nondisclosure agreement or a +software license agreement. For years I worked within the + <a name="index-AI-_0028Artificial-Intelligence_0029-Lab_002c-MIT-_0028see-also-MIT_0029-1"> + </a> + Artificial +Intelligence Lab to resist such tendencies and other inhospitalities, +but eventually they had gone too far: I could not remain in an +institution where such things are done for me against my will. + </p> + <p> + So that I can continue to use computers without dishonor, I have +decided to put together a sufficient body of free software so that I +will be able to get along without any software that is not free. I +have resigned from the + <a name="index-MIT_002c-AI-_0028Artificial-Intelligence_0029-Lab-3"> + </a> + AI Lab to deny MIT any legal excuse to prevent +me from giving GNU away. + <a href="#FOOT13" name="DOCF13"> + (13) + </a> + ) for more +explanation. + </p> + <a name="Why-GNU-Will-Be-Compatible-with-Unix"> + </a> + <h3 class="subheading"> + Why GNU Will Be Compatible with Unix + </h3> + <a name="index-Unix-compatibility_002c-reason-for-1"> + </a> + <p> + Unix is not my ideal system, but it is not too bad. The essential +features of Unix seem to be good ones, and I think I can fill in what +Unix lacks without spoiling them. And a system compatible with Unix +would be convenient for many other people to adopt. + </p> + <a name="How-GNU-Will-Be-Available"> + </a> + <h3 class="subheading"> + How GNU Will Be Available + </h3> + <a name="index-public-domain-software-_0028see-also-software_0029-1"> + </a> + <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-programs-_0028see-also-software_0029"> + </a> + <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-software-_0028see-also-software_0029-3"> + </a> + <p> + GNU is not in the public domain. Everyone will be permitted to +modify and redistribute GNU, but no distributor will be allowed to +restrict its further redistribution. That is to say, +proprietary modifications will not be allowed. I want to make sure that all +versions of GNU remain free. + </p> + <a name="Why-Many-Other-Programmers-Want-to-Help"> + </a> + <h3 class="subheading"> + Why Many Other Programmers Want to Help + </h3> + <a name="index-programmers_002c-incentive-for"> + </a> + <a name="index-programmers_002c-psychosocial-harm-to"> + </a> + <p> + I have found many other programmers who are excited about GNU and +want to help. + Many programmers are unhappy about the commercialization of system +software. It may enable them to make more money, but it requires them +to feel in conflict with other programmers in general rather than feel +as comrades. The fundamental act of friendship among programmers is the +sharing of programs; marketing arrangements now typically used +essentially forbid programmers to treat others as friends. The +purchaser of software must choose between friendship and obeying the +law. Naturally, many decide that friendship is more important. But +those who believe in law often do not feel at ease with either choice. +They become cynical and think that programming is just a way of making +money. + </p> + <p> + By working on and using GNU rather than proprietary programs, we can +be hospitable to everyone and obey the law. In addition, GNU serves as +an example to inspire and a banner to rally others to join us in +sharing. This can give us a feeling of harmony which is impossible if +we use software that is not free. For about half the programmers I +talk to, this is an important happiness that money cannot replace. + </p> + <a name="How-You-Can-Contribute"> + </a> + <h3 class="subheading"> + How You Can Contribute + </h3> + <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-contribute-to-GNU-1"> + </a> + <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-donate"> + </a> + <p> + I am asking computer manufacturers for donations of machines and +money. I’m asking individuals for donations of programs and +work. + <a href="#FOOT14" name="DOCF14"> + (14) + </a> + </p> + <p> + One consequence you can expect if you donate machines is that GNU +will run on them at an early date. The machines should be complete, +ready to use systems, approved for use in a residential area, and not +in need of sophisticated cooling or power. + </p> + <p> + I have found very many programmers eager to contribute part-time +work for GNU. + <a name="index-Unix-compatibility_002c-ease-of-contribution-because-of-1"> + </a> + For most projects, such part-time distributed work would +be very hard to coordinate; the independently written parts would not +work together. But for the particular task of replacing Unix, this +problem is absent. A complete Unix system contains hundreds of utility +programs, each of which is documented separately. Most interface +specifications are fixed by Unix compatibility. If each contributor +can write a compatible replacement for a single Unix utility, and make +it work properly in place of the original on a Unix system, then these +utilities will work right when put together. Even allowing for Murphy +to create a few unexpected problems, assembling these components will +be a feasible task. (The kernel will require closer communication and +will be worked on by a small, tight group.) + </p> + <p> + If I get donations of money, I may be able to hire a few people full +or part time. The salary won’t be high by programmers’ standards, but +I’m looking for people for whom building community spirit is as +important as making money. I view this as a way of enabling dedicated +people to devote their full energies to working on GNU by sparing them +the need to make a living in another way. + <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-donate-1"> + </a> + <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-contribute-to-GNU-2"> + </a> + </p> + <a name="Why-All-Computer-Users-Will-Benefit"> + </a> + <h3 class="subheading"> + Why All Computer Users Will Benefit + </h3> + <a name="index-users_002c-benefit-to"> + </a> + <p> + Once GNU is written, everyone will be able to obtain good system +software free, just like air. + <a href="#FOOT15" name="DOCF15"> + (15) + </a> + </p> + <p> + This means much more than just saving everyone the price of a Unix +license. It means that much wasteful duplication of system programming +effort will be avoided. This effort can go instead into advancing the +state of the art. + </p> + <p> + Complete system sources will be available to everyone. As a result, +a user who needs changes in the system will always be free to make them +himself, or hire any available programmer or company to make them for +him. Users will no longer be at the mercy of one programmer or company +which owns the sources and is in sole position to make changes. + </p> + <a name="index-education_002c-free-software-in"> + </a> + <a name="index-schools_002c-free-software-in"> + </a> + <p> + Schools will be able to provide a much more educational environment +by encouraging all students to study and improve the system code. +Harvard’s computer lab used to have the policy that no program could be +installed on the system if its sources were not on public display, and +upheld it by actually refusing to install certain programs. I was very +much inspired by this. + </p> + <p> + Finally, the overhead of considering who owns the system software +and what one is or is not entitled to do with it will be lifted. + </p> + <p> + Arrangements to make people pay for using a program, including +licensing of copies, always incur a tremendous cost to society through +the cumbersome mechanisms necessary to figure out how much (that is, +which programs) a person must pay for. And only a police state can +force everyone to obey them. Consider a space station where air must +be manufactured at great cost: charging each breather per liter of air +may be fair, but wearing the metered gas mask all day and all night is +intolerable even if everyone can afford to pay the air bill. And the +TV cameras everywhere to see if you ever take the mask off are +outrageous. It’s better to support the air plant with a head tax and +chuck the masks. + </p> + <p> + Copying all or parts of a program is as natural to a programmer as +breathing, and as productive. It ought to be as free. + </p> + <a name="Some-Easily-Rebutted-Objections-to-GNU_0027s-Goals"> + </a> + <h3 class="subheading"> + Some Easily Rebutted Objections to GNU’s Goals + </h3> + <a name="index-GNU_002c-objections-to"> + </a> + <a name="index-GNU_002c-user-support"> + </a> + <a name="index-users_002c-technical-support-for-GNU"> + </a> + <p> + &bullet; + <strong> + “Nobody will use it if it is free, because that means they can’t rely on any support.” + </strong> + </p> + <p> + &bullet; + <strong> + “You have to charge for the program to pay for providing the support.” + </strong> + </p> + <p> + If people would rather pay for GNU plus service than get GNU free +without service, a company to provide just service to people who have +obtained GNU free ought to be profitable. + <a href="#FOOT16" name="DOCF16"> + (16) + </a> + </p> + <p> + We must distinguish between support in the form of real programming +work and mere handholding. The former is something one cannot rely on +from a software vendor. If your problem is not shared by enough +people, the vendor will tell you to get lost. + </p> + <p> + If your business needs to be able to rely on support, the only way +is to have all the necessary sources and tools. Then you can hire any +available person to fix your problem; you are not at the mercy of any +individual. With Unix, the price of sources puts this out of +consideration for most businesses. With GNU this will be easy. It is +still possible for there to be no available competent person, but this +problem cannot be blamed on distribution arrangements. GNU does not +eliminate all the world’s problems, only some of them. + </p> + <p> + Meanwhile, the users who know nothing about computers need +handholding: doing things for them which they could easily do +themselves but don’t know how. + </p> + <p> + Such services could be provided by companies that sell just +handholding and repair service. If it is true that users would rather +spend money and get a product with service, they will also be willing +to buy the service having got the product free. The service companies +will compete in quality and price; users will not be tied to any +particular one. Meanwhile, those of us who don’t need the service +should be able to use the program without paying for the service. + <br> + <a name="index-GNU_002c-advertising-for"> + </a> + &bullet; + <strong> + “You cannot reach many people without advertising, and +you must charge for the program to support that.” + </strong> + <br> + &bullet; + <strong> + “It’s no use advertising a program people can get +free.” + </strong> + </br> + </br> + </p> + <p> + There are various forms of free or very cheap publicity that can be +used to inform numbers of computer users about something like GNU. But +it may be true that one can reach more microcomputer users with +advertising. If this is really so, a business which advertises the +service of copying and mailing GNU for a fee ought to be successful +enough to pay for its advertising and more. This way, only the users +who benefit from the advertising pay for it. + </p> + <p> + On the other hand, if many people get GNU from their friends, and +such companies don’t succeed, this will show that advertising was not +really necessary to spread GNU. Why is it that free market advocates +don’t want to let the free market decide this? + <a href="#FOOT17" name="DOCF17"> + (17) + </a> + <br> + <a name="index-competition_002c-impact-on"> + </a> + &bullet; + <strong> + “My company needs a proprietary operating system to get +a competitive edge.” + </strong> + </br> + </p> + <p> + GNU will remove operating system software from the realm of +competition. You will not be able to get an edge in this area, but +neither will your competitors be able to get an edge over you. You and +they will compete in other areas, while benefiting mutually in this +one. If your business is selling an operating system, you will not +like GNU, but that’s tough on you. If your business is something else, +GNU can save you from being pushed into the expensive business of +selling operating systems. + </p> + <p> + I would like to see GNU development supported by gifts from many +manufacturers and users, reducing the cost to each. + <a href="#FOOT18" name="DOCF18"> + (18) + </a> + <br> + <a name="index-programmers_002c-income-for-2"> + </a> + <a name="index-programmers_002c-and-creativity-and-entitlement"> + </a> + &bullet; + <strong> + “Don’t programmers deserve a reward for their +creativity?” + </strong> + </br> + </p> + <p> + If anything deserves a reward, it is social contribution. +Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society +is free to use the results. If programmers deserve to be rewarded for +creating innovative programs, by the same token they deserve to be +punished if they restrict the use of these programs. + <br> + &bullet; + <strong> + “Shouldn’t a programmer be able to ask for a reward for +his creativity?” + </strong> + </br> + </p> + <a name="index-programmers_002c-income-for-3"> + </a> + <p> + There is nothing wrong with wanting pay for work, or seeking to +maximize one’s income, as long as one does not use means that are +destructive. But the means customary in the field of software today +are based on destruction. + </p> + <p> + Extracting money from users of a program by restricting their use of +it is destructive because the restrictions reduce the amount and the +ways that the program can be used. This reduces the amount of wealth +that humanity derives from the program. When there is a deliberate +choice to restrict, the harmful consequences are deliberate destruction. + </p> + <a name="index-citizen-values_002c-Golden-Rule-1"> + </a> + <p> + The reason a good citizen does not use such destructive means to +become wealthier is that, if everyone did so, we would all become +poorer from the mutual destructiveness. This is + <a name="index-Kantian-ethics"> + </a> + Kantian ethics; or, + <a name="index-Golden-Rule-2"> + </a> + the Golden Rule. Since I do not like the consequences that result if +everyone hoards information, I am required to consider it wrong for one +to do so. Specifically, the desire to be rewarded for one’s creativity +does not justify depriving the world in general of all or part of that +creativity. + <br> + &bullet; + <strong> + “Won’t programmers starve?” + </strong> + </br> + </p> + <p> + I could answer that nobody is forced to be a programmer. Most of us +cannot manage to get any money for standing on the street and making +faces. But we are not, as a result, condemned to spend our lives +standing on the street making faces, and starving. We do something +else. + </p> + <p> + But that is the wrong answer because it accepts the questioner’s +implicit assumption: that without ownership of software, programmers +cannot possibly be paid a cent. Supposedly it is all or nothing. + </p> + <p> + The real reason programmers will not starve is that it will still be +possible for them to get paid for programming; just not paid as much as +now. + </p> + <p> + Restricting copying is not the only basis for business in software. +It is the most common basis + <a href="#FOOT19" name="DOCF19"> + (19) + </a> + because it +brings in the most money. If it were prohibited, or rejected by the +customer, software business would move to other bases of organization +which are now used less often. There are always numerous ways to +organize any kind of business. + </p> + <p> + Probably programming will not be as lucrative on the new basis as it +is now. But that is not an argument against the change. It is not +considered an injustice that sales clerks make the salaries that they +now do. If programmers made the same, that would not be an injustice +either. (In practice they would still make considerably more than +that.) + <a name="index-programmers_002c-income-for-4"> + </a> + <br/> + </p> + <p> + &bullet; + <strong> + “Don’t people have a right to control how their creativity is used?” + </strong> + </p> + <a name="index-patents-1"> + </a> + <a name="index-_0060_0060intellectual-property_002c_0027_0027-bias-and-fallacy-of-term-_0028see-also-ownership_0029"> + </a> + <p> + “Control over the use of one’s ideas” really constitutes +control over other people’s lives; and it is usually used to make +their lives more difficult. + </p> + <p> + People who have studied the issue of intellectual property +rights + <a href="#FOOT20" name="DOCF20"> + (20) + </a> + ) for further explanation of how this +term spreads confusion and bias. + carefully (such as lawyers) say that +there is no intrinsic right to intellectual property. The kinds of +supposed intellectual property rights that the government recognizes +were created by specific acts of legislation for specific purposes. + </p> + <p> + For example, the patent system was established to encourage +inventors to disclose the details of their inventions. Its purpose was +to help society rather than to help inventors. At the time, the life +span of 17 years for a patent was short compared with the rate of +advance of the state of the art. Since patents are an issue only among +manufacturers, for whom the cost and effort of a license agreement are +small compared with setting up production, the patents often do not do +much harm. They do not obstruct most individuals who use patented +products. + </p> + <p> + The idea of copyright did not exist in ancient times, when authors +frequently copied other authors at length in works of nonfiction. This +practice was useful, and is the only way many authors’ works have +survived even in part. The copyright system was created expressly for +the purpose of encouraging authorship. In the domain for which it was +invented—books, which could be copied economically only on a printing +press—it did little harm, and did not obstruct most of the individuals +who read the books. + </p> + <p> + All intellectual property rights are just licenses granted by society +because it was thought, rightly or wrongly, that society as a whole +would benefit by granting them. But in any particular situation, we +have to ask: are we really better off granting such license? What kind +of act are we licensing a person to do? + <a name="index-_0060_0060intellectual-property_002c_0027_0027-bias-and-fallacy-of-term-_0028see-also-ownership_0029-1"> + </a> + </p> + <p> + The case of programs today is very different from that of books a +hundred years ago. The fact that the easiest way to copy a program is +from one neighbor to another, the fact that a program has both source +code and object code which are distinct, and the fact that a program is +used rather than read and enjoyed, combine to create a situation in +which a person who enforces a copyright is harming society as a whole +both materially and spiritually; in which a person should not do so +regardless of whether the law enables him to. + <a name="index-programmers_002c-and-creativity-and-entitlement-1"> + </a> + <br> + <a name="index-competition_002c-impact-on-1"> + </a> + &bullet; + <strong> + “Competition makes things get done +better.” + </strong> + </br> + </p> + <p> + The paradigm of competition is a race: by rewarding the winner, we +encourage everyone to run faster. When capitalism really works this +way, it does a good job; but its defenders are wrong in assuming it +always works this way. If the runners forget why the reward is offered +and become intent on winning, no matter how, they may find other +strategies—such as, attacking other runners. If the runners get into +a fist fight, they will all finish late. + </p> + <p> + Proprietary and secret software is the moral equivalent of runners +in a fist fight. Sad to say, the only referee we’ve got does not seem +to object to fights; he just regulates them (“For every ten +yards you run, you can fire one shot”). He really ought to +break them up, and penalize runners for even trying to fight. + <br> + <a name="index-programmers_002c-incentive-for-1"> + </a> + &bullet; + <strong> + “Won’t everyone stop programming without a monetary incentive?” + </strong> + </br> + </p> + <p> + Actually, many people will program with absolutely no monetary +incentive. Programming has an irresistible fascination for some +people, usually the people who are best at it. There is no shortage of +professional musicians who keep at it even though they have no hope of +making a living that way. + </p> + <p> + But really this question, though commonly asked, is not appropriate +to the situation. Pay for programmers will not disappear, only become +less. So the right question is, will anyone program with a reduced +monetary incentive? My experience shows that they will. + </p> + <a name="index-AI-_0028Artificial-Intelligence_0029-Lab_002c-MIT-_0028see-also-MIT_0029-2"> + </a> + <p> + For more than ten years, many of the world’s best programmers worked +at the Artificial Intelligence Lab for far less money than they could +have had anywhere else. They got many kinds of nonmonetary rewards: +fame and appreciation, for example. And creativity is also fun, a +reward in itself. + </p> + <p> + Then most of them left when offered a chance to do the same +interesting work for a lot of money. + </p> + <p> + What the facts show is that people will program for reasons other +than riches; but if given a chance to make a lot of money as well, they +will come to expect and demand it. Low-paying organizations do poorly +in competition with high-paying ones, but they do not have to do badly +if the high-paying ones are banned. + <a name="index-programmers_002c-incentive-for-2"> + </a> + <br> + &bullet; + <strong> + “We need the programmers desperately. If they demand that we stop helping our neighbors, we have to obey.” + </strong> + </br> + </p> + <p> + You’re never so desperate that you have to obey this sort of demand. +Remember: millions for defense, but not a cent for tribute! + <br/> + </p> + <a name="index-programmers_002c-income-for-5"> + </a> + <a name="index-development_002c-funding-for-2"> + </a> + <p> + &bullet; + <strong> + “Programmers need to make a living somehow.” + </strong> + </p> + <p> + In the short run, this is true. However, there are plenty of ways +that programmers could make a living without selling the right to use a +program. This way is customary now because it brings programmers and +businessmen the most money, not because it is the only way to make a +living. It is easy to find other ways if you want to find them. Here +are a number of examples. + </p> + <p> + A manufacturer introducing a new computer will pay for the porting of +operating systems onto the new hardware. + </p> + <p> + The sale of teaching, handholding and maintenance services could +also employ programmers. + </p> + <a name="index-freeware-_0028see-also-software_0029"> + </a> + <p> + People with new ideas could distribute programs as +freeware, + <a href="#FOOT21" name="DOCF21"> + (21) + </a> + ) for more explanation. + asking for donations from satisfied +users, or selling handholding services. I have met people who are +already working this way successfully. + </p> + <p> + Users with related needs can form users’ groups, and pay dues. A +group would contract with programming companies to write programs that +the group’s members would like to use. + </p> + <a name="index-software_002c-software-tax"> + </a> + <p> + All sorts of development can be funded with a Software Tax: + </p> + <p> + Suppose everyone who buys a computer has to pay + <em> + x + </em> + percent of the + price as a software tax. The government gives this to an agency + like the + <a name="index-National-Science-Foundation-_0028NSF_0029"> + </a> + NSF to spend on software development. + </p> + <p> + But if the computer buyer makes a donation to software development + himself, he can take a credit against the tax. He can donate to + the project of his own choosing—often, chosen because he hopes to + use the results when it is done. He can take a credit for any + amount of donation up to the total tax he had to pay. + </p> + <p> + The total tax rate could be decided by a vote of the payers of the + tax, weighted according to the amount they will be taxed on. + </p> + <p> + The consequences: + </p> + <ul> + <li> + The computer-using community supports software development. + </li> + <li> + This community decides what level of support is needed. + </li> + <li> + Users who care which projects their share is spent on can choose this for themselves. + </li> + </ul> + <p> + In the long run, making programs free is a step toward the +postscarcity world, where nobody will have to work very hard just to +make a living. People will be free to devote themselves to activities +that are fun, such as programming, after spending the necessary ten +hours a week on required tasks such as legislation, family counseling, +robot repair and asteroid prospecting. There will be no need to be +able to make a living from programming. + </p> + <a name="index-users_002c-benefit-to-1"> + </a> + <p> + We have already greatly reduced the amount of work that the whole +society must do for its actual productivity, but only a little of this +has translated itself into leisure for workers because much +nonproductive activity is required to accompany productive activity. +The main causes of this are bureaucracy and isometric struggles against +competition. Free software will greatly reduce these drains in the +area of software production. We must do this, in order for technical +gains in productivity to translate into less work for us. + <a name="index-GNU_002c-objections-to-1"> + </a> + <a name="index-programmers_002c-income-for-6"> + </a> + <a name="index-development_002c-funding-for-3"> + </a> + <a name="index-_0060_0060GNU-Manifesto_0027_0027-1"> + </a> + <a name="index-GNU_002c-_0060_0060GNU-Manifesto_0027_0027-1"> + </a> + </p> + <div class="footnote"> + <hr> + <h3> + Footnotes + </h3> + <h3> + <a href="#DOCF12" name="FOOT12"> + (12) + </a> + </h3> + <p> + The wording here was +careless. The intention was that nobody would have to pay for + <em> + permission + </em> + to use the GNU system. But the words don’t make this +clear, and people often interpret them as saying that copies of GNU +should always be distributed at little or no charge. That was never +the intent; later on, the manifesto mentions the possibility of +companies providing the service of distribution for a +profit. Subsequently I have learned to distinguish carefully between +“free” in the sense of freedom and “free” in the sense of +price. Free software is software that users have the freedom to +distribute and change. Some users may obtain copies at no charge, +while others pay to obtain copies—and if the funds help support +improving the software, so much the better. The important thing is +that everyone who has a copy has the freedom to cooperate with others +in using it. + </p> + <h3> + <a href="#DOCF13" name="FOOT13"> + (13) + </a> + </h3> + <p> + The expression + <a name="index-_0060_0060give-away-software_002c_0027_0027-misleading-use-of-term"> + </a> + “give away” is another indication that I had not yet clearly +separated the issue of price from that of freedom. We now recommend +avoiding this expression when talking about free software. See “Words +to Avoid (or Use with Care)” + </p> + <h3> + <a href="#DOCF14" name="FOOT14"> + (14) + </a> + </h3> + <p> + Nowadays, for software tasks to work on, see the + <a name="index-High-Priority-Projects-list"> + </a> + High Priority Projects list, at + <a href="http://fsf.org/campaigns/priority-projects/"> + http://fsf.org/campaigns/priority-projects/ + </a> + , and the + <a name="index-GNU-Help-Wanted-list"> + </a> + GNU +Help Wanted list, the general task list for GNU software packages, at + <a href="http://savannah.gnu.org/people/?type_id=1"> + http://savannah.gnu.org/people/?type_id=1 + </a> + . For other ways to +help, see + <a href="http://gnu.org/help/help.html"> + http://gnu.org/help/help.html + </a> + . + </p> + <h3> + <a href="#DOCF15" name="FOOT15"> + (15) + </a> + </h3> + <p> + This is another place I failed +to distinguish carefully between the two different meanings of +“free.” The statement as it stands is not false—you can get copies +of GNU software at no charge, from your friends or over the net. But +it does suggest the wrong idea. + </p> + <h3> + <a href="#DOCF16" name="FOOT16"> + (16) + </a> + </h3> + <p> + Several such companies now exist. + </p> + <h3> + <a href="#DOCF17" name="FOOT17"> + (17) + </a> + </h3> + <p> + Although it is +a charity rather than a company, the + <a name="index-FSF_002c-fundraising-1"> + </a> + <a name="index-FSF_002c-how-you-can-help"> + </a> + Free Software Foundation for 10 +years raised most of its funds from its distribution service. You can +order things from the FSF to support its work. + </p> + <h3> + <a href="#DOCF18" name="FOOT18"> + (18) + </a> + </h3> + <p> + A group +of computer companies pooled funds around 1991 to support maintenance +of the + <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-C-compiler-_0028see-also-GNU_002c-GCC_0029-1"> + </a> + GNU C Compiler. + </p> + <h3> + <a href="#DOCF19" name="FOOT19"> + (19) + </a> + </h3> + <p> + I think I was mistaken in saying +that proprietary software was the most common basis for making money +in software. It seems that actually the most common business model was +and is development of custom software. That does not offer the +possibility of collecting rents, so the business has to keep doing +real work in order to keep getting income. The custom software +business would continue to exist, more or less unchanged, in a free +software world. Therefore, I no longer expect that most paid +programmers would earn less in a free software world. + </p> + <h3> + <a href="#DOCF20" name="FOOT20"> + (20) + </a> + </h3> + <p> + In the 1980s I had not yet realized how confusing it +was to speak of “the issue” of “intellectual property.” That term +is obviously biased; more subtle is the fact that it lumps together +various disparate laws which raise very different issues. Nowadays I +urge people to reject the term “intellectual property” entirely, +lest it lead others to suppose that those laws form one coherent +issue. The way to be clear is to discuss patents, copyrights, and + <a name="index-trademarks-and_002for-trademark-law"> + </a> + trademarks separately. See “Did You Say ‘Intellectual Property’? It’s +a Seductive Mirage”. + </p> + <h3> + <a href="#DOCF21" name="FOOT21"> + (21) + </a> + </h3> + <p> + Subsequently we learned to distinguish between +“free software” and “freeware.” The term “freeware” means +software you are free to redistribute, but usually you are not free to +study and change the source code, so most of it is not free +software. See “Words to Avoid (or Use with Care)”. + </p> + </hr> + </div> + <hr size="2"/> + |