[FSF India] [Debate] On Free Software and Freedom

Khuzaima A. Lakdawala fsf-india@gnu.org.in
22 Aug 2001 23:24:21 +0530


Raj Singh <raj@ceeri.ernet.in> writes:

> Really worth reading. To my surprise, FSF appears to be on "weaker" moral
> ground in this debate (a rare event). 

Dear Raj,

Please enlighten us as to why *you* think we are on "weaker moral
ground in this debate."

Since RMS and Brad may not have the time to monitor this list, it just
*might* be that others on this list may be able to debate this with
you and convince you that we are, in fact, NOT on "weaker" moral grounds.

Thank you.

>                                       For detailed reading, please visit
> the _Linux Today_ site.
> 
> -- Raj
> 
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> 
> Linux Today (http://www.linuxtoday.com/)
> 
> "Freedom Zero" and "Freedom or Power" : Tim O'Reilly and FSF Leaders
> Debate. Followed by Eric Raymond on "Freedom, Power, or Confusion?"
> 
> Aug 17, 2001, 17:38 UTC
> 
> Tim O'Reilly:
> 
> Some people might not recognize the reference to "Freedom Zero" as a
> takeoff on the first of Richard Stallman's four freedoms from the Free
> Software Definition."
> 
> Bradley Kuhn and Richard M. Stallman:
> 
> Tim O'Reilly says the most fundamental software freedom is: "The freedom to
> choose any license you want for software you write." Unstated, but clearly
> implied, is that one person or corporation chooses the rules to impose on
> everyone else. In the world that O'Reilly proposes, a few make the basic
> software decisions for everyone. That is power, not freedom. He should call
> it "powerplay zero" in contrast with our "freedom zero".
> 
> O'Reilly's Response:
> 
> "Bradley clearly misunderstands my article and my argument. First off, if
> you accept his definition of freedom as "being able to make decisions that
> affect mainly you" versus power as "being able to make decisions that
> affect others more than you", then clearly the GPL is just as much about
> "power" as any Microsoft license, since it is binding on all who use the
> software, and has the explicit goal of "world domination."
> 
> Eric Raymond: Freedom, Power, or Confusion?
> 
> In a reply to Tim O'Reilly, Bradley Kuhn and Richard Stallman illustrate
> once again why the FSF's use of the word `freedom' is ... well, I'll say
> "confusing", though stronger terms suggest themselves.
> 
> They begin by writing "Power is being able to make decisions that affect
> others more than you. If we confuse power with freedom, we will fail to
> uphold real freedom." Thus, far I agree with them.
> 
> Tim asserts that the most fundamental software freedom is the freedom to
> choose any license you want for the software you write. Kuhn and Stallman
> reply (unstated, but clearly implied) is "that one person or corporation
> chooses the rules to impose on everyone else."
> 
> ================================================================
> 
> _______________________________________________
> http://gnu.org.in/mailman/listinfo/fsf-india
> 
> 

-- 
Khuzaima A. Lakdawala