More precisely, RMS says that he makes no distinction between users and developers, because developers are also users. He argues that limiting freedom to only a subset of users is divisive and antithetical to the concept of freedom.
Freedom only for developers is kind of like a democracy where only wealthy landowners are allowed to vote. On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 4:02 PM, Richard Pieri <richard.pi...@gmail.com>wrote: > MBR wrote: > >> that anyway. But if she reads and understands those articles, she'll be >> much better prepared to answer questions and carry on knowledgeable >> conversations with people who might approach her after her talk. >> > > Just remember that the article in question, like the FSF itself, is rather > one-sided. When RMS says "Free Software" he means free for users. > Developers have few freedoms and many requirements under the FSF's > definition of freedom. It's a big reason why Apache-style licensing has > been outpacing GPL licensing. > > -- > Rich P. > > _______________________________________________ > Discuss mailing list > Discuss@blu.org > http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > -- John Abreau / Executive Director, Boston Linux & Unix Email: abre...@gmail.com / WWW http://www.abreau.net / PGP-Key-ID 0x920063C6 PGP-Key-Fingerprint A5AD 6BE1 FEFE 8E4F 5C23 C2D0 E885 E17C 9200 63C6 _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss