From 1ae0306a3cf2ea27f60b2d205789994d260c2cce Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Christian Grothoff Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2020 13:29:45 +0200 Subject: add i18n FSFS --- .../blog/articles/en/gpl-american-way.html | 181 +++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 181 insertions(+) create mode 100644 talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/gpl-american-way.html (limited to 'talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/gpl-american-way.html') diff --git a/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/gpl-american-way.html b/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/gpl-american-way.html new file mode 100644 index 0000000..b35ea7e --- /dev/null +++ b/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/gpl-american-way.html @@ -0,0 +1,181 @@ + + +The GNU GPL and the American Way +- GNU Project - Free Software Foundation + + + +

The GNU GPL and the American Way

+ +

by Richard M. Stallman

+ +

+Microsoft describes the GNU General Public License (GNU GPL) as an +“open source” license, and says it is against the American +Way. To understand the GNU GPL, and recognize how it embodies the +American Way, you must first be aware that the GPL was not designed +for open source.

+

+The Open Source Movement, which was launched in 1998, aims to develop +powerful, reliable software and improved technology, by inviting the +public to collaborate in software development. Many developers in +that movement use the GNU GPL, and they are welcome to use it. But +the ideas and logic of the GPL cannot be found in the Open Source +Movement. They stem from the deeper goals and values of the Free +Software Movement.

+

+The Free Software Movement was founded in 1984, but its inspiration +comes from the ideals of 1776: freedom, community, and voluntary +cooperation. This is what leads to free enterprise, to free speech, +and to free software.

+

+As in “free enterprise” and “free speech”, the +“free” in “free software” refers to freedom, +not price; specifically, it means that you have the freedom to study, +change, and redistribute the software you use. These freedoms permit +citizens to help themselves and help each other, and thus participate +in a community. This contrasts with the more common proprietary +software, which keeps users helpless and divided: the inner workings +are secret, and you are prohibited from sharing the program with your +neighbor. Powerful, reliable software and improved technology are +useful byproducts of freedom, but the freedom to have a community is +important in its own right.

+

+We could not establish a community of freedom in the land of +proprietary software where each program had its lord. We had to build +a new land in cyberspace—the free software GNU operating system, +which we started writing in 1984. In 1991, when GNU was almost +finished, the kernel Linux written by Linus Torvalds filled the last +gap; soon the free GNU/Linux system was available. Today millions of +users use GNU/Linux and enjoy the benefits of freedom and community.

+

+I designed the GNU GPL to uphold and defend the freedoms that define +free software—to use the words of 1776, it establishes them as +inalienable rights for programs released under the GPL. It ensures +that you have the freedom to study, change, and redistribute the +program, by saying that nobody is authorized to take these freedoms +away from you by redistributing the program under a restrictive +license.

+

+For the sake of cooperation, we encourage others to modify and extend +the programs that we publish. For the sake of freedom, we set the +condition that these modified versions of our programs must respect +your freedom just like the original version. We encourage two-way +cooperation by rejecting parasites: whoever wishes to copy parts of +our software into his program must let us use parts of that program in +our programs. Nobody is forced to join our club, but those who wish +to participate must offer us the same cooperation they receive from +us. That makes the system fair.

+

+Millions of users, tens of thousands of developers, and companies as +large as IBM, Intel, and Sun, have chosen to participate on this +basis. But some companies want the advantages without the +responsibilities.

+

+From time to time, companies have said to us, “We would make an +improved version of this program if you allow us to release it without +freedom.” We say, “No thanks—your improvements might +be useful if they were free, but if we can't use them in freedom, they +are no good at all.” Then they appeal to our egos, saying that +our code will have “more users” inside their proprietary +programs. We respond that we value our community's freedom more than +an irrelevant form of popularity.

+

+Microsoft surely would like to have the benefit of our code without +the responsibilities. But it has another, more specific purpose in +attacking the GNU GPL. Microsoft is known generally for imitation +rather than innovation. When Microsoft does something new, its +purpose is strategic—not to improve computing for its users, but +to close off alternatives for them.

+

+Microsoft uses an anticompetitive strategy called “embrace and +extend”. This means they start with the technology others are +using, add a minor wrinkle which is secret so that nobody else can +imitate it, then use that secret wrinkle so that only Microsoft +software can communicate with other Microsoft software. In some +cases, this makes it hard for you to use a non-Microsoft program when +others you work with use a Microsoft program. In other cases, this +makes it hard for you to use a non-Microsoft program for job A if you +use a Microsoft program for job B. Either way, “embrace and +extend” magnifies the effect of Microsoft's market power.

+

+No license can stop Microsoft from practicing “embrace and +extend” if they are determined to do so at all costs. If they +write their own program from scratch, and use none of our code, the +license on our code does not affect them. But a total rewrite is +costly and hard, and even Microsoft can't do it all the time. Hence +their campaign to persuade us to abandon the license that protects our +community, the license that won't let them say, “What's yours is +mine, and what's mine is mine.” They want us to let them take +whatever they want, without ever giving anything back. They want us +to abandon our defenses.

+

+But defenselessness is not the American Way. In the land of the brave +and the free, we defend our freedom with the GNU GPL.

+ +

Addendum:

+ +

+Microsoft says that the GPL is against “intellectual property +rights.” I have no opinion on “intellectual property +rights,” because the term is too broad to have a sensible +opinion about. It is a catch-all, covering copyrights, patents, +trademarks, and other disparate areas of law; areas so different, in +the laws and in their effects, that any statement about all of them at +once is surely simplistic. To think intelligently about copyrights, +patents or trademarks, you must think about them separately. The +first step is declining to lump them together as “intellectual +property”.

+

+My views about copyright take an hour to expound, but one general +principle applies: it cannot justify denying the public important +freedoms. As Abraham Lincoln put it, “Whenever there is a +conflict between human rights and property rights, human rights must +prevail.” Property rights are meant to advance human well-being, +not as an excuse to disregard it.

+ + + + + + -- cgit v1.2.3