1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
|
<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" -->
<!-- Parent-Version: 1.96 -->
<!-- This page is derived from /server/standards/boilerplate.html -->
<!--#set var="TAGS" value="essays cultural evils" -->
<!--#set var="DISABLE_TOP_ADDENDUM" value="yes" -->
<title>On the Microsoft Verdict - GNU Project - Free Software Foundation</title>
<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/microsoft-verdict.translist" -->
<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" -->
<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/ph-breadcrumb.html" -->
<!--GNUN: OUT-OF-DATE NOTICE-->
<!--#include virtual="/server/top-addendum.html" -->
<div class="article reduced-width">
<h2>On the Microsoft Verdict</h2>
<div class="thin"></div>
<p>
Many
<a href="/gnu/linux-and-gnu.html">GNU/Linux</a>
users think of the system as competition for Microsoft.
But the Free Software Movement aims to solve a problem that is much
bigger than Microsoft: proprietary, nonfree software, designed to
keep users helpless and prohibit cooperation. Microsoft is the
largest developer of such software, but many other companies treat the
users' freedom just as badly; if they have not shackled as many users
as Microsoft, it is not for lack of trying.</p>
<p>
Since Microsoft is just a part of the problem, its defeat in the
anti-trust lawsuit is not necessarily a victory for free software.
Whether the outcome of this suit helps free software and promotes
users' freedom depends of the specific remedies imposed on Microsoft
by the judge.</p>
<p>
If the remedies are designed to enable other companies compete in
offering proprietary, nonfree software, that will do the Free World
no particular good. Alternative possible masters is not freedom. And
competition could lead them to do a “better” job, better
in a narrow technical sense; then it could be harder for us to
“compete” with them technically. We will continue to
offer the user one thing those companies do
not—freedom—and users who value freedom will continue to
choose free software for that reason. But users who do not value
freedom, and choose a system based on mere convenience, might be
enticed away to “improved” proprietary systems.</p>
<p>
Splitting Microsoft into separate companies could also endanger free
software, because these smaller companies, no longer held in check by
the public readiness to condemn Microsoft, might see fit to attack
free software more harshly than the present unified Microsoft does.</p>
<p>
I've
<a href="/philosophy/microsoft-antitrust.html">proposed remedies</a>
for this case that would help free software compete with Microsoft:
for example, requiring Microsoft to publish documentation for all
interfaces, and to use patents only for defense, not for aggression.
These remedies would block the use of the weapons that Microsoft plans
to use against us (according to the “Halloween documents”
leaked from within Microsoft which spelled out how they plan to impede
development of the GNU/Linux system).</p>
<p>
When we see what remedies the judge chooses, we will get an idea of
whether the case has been helpful or harmful to the Free Software
Movement.</p>
</div>
</div><!-- for id="content", starts in the include above -->
<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
<div id="footer" role="contentinfo">
<div class="unprintable">
<p>Please send general FSF & GNU inquiries to
<a href="mailto:gnu@gnu.org"><gnu@gnu.org></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"><webmasters@gnu.org></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">
<web-translators@gnu.org></a>.</p>
<p>For information on coordinating and contributing 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 contributing 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 © 2000, 2021 Free Software Foundation, Inc.</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: 2021/10/01 17:02:54 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
</div>
</div><!-- for class="inner", starts in the banner include -->
</body>
</html>
|
