On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 02:52:00PM -0500, Ilya Shlyakhter wrote: > "Of the many things you can accuse the FSF of, this is not one > of them" -- It's a direct quote from > https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/shouldbefree.html .
Touché. You left out: > Those who benefit from the current system where programs are property > offer two arguments in support of their claims to own programs: the > emotional argument and the economic argument. the "emotional argument" being applicable here (at the risk of being wrong again, I did not find that specific beOrg quote via a customary search; I am ready to concede he will licence it under a free-software licence once users start to flock in numbers). I think it is unfair quote to the FSF, as they worked very hard to dismantle the `libre == gratis` equivalence. :) I am not going to be embroiled in this any further; *some* of the arguments you made in this and the orgmode ML threads seems to come from an open-source perspective. Again, nothing wrong with it, but when it's ethically a no-no (from a free software perspective) and practically dubious (i.e. is there any evidence people are turned away from Org because because of it?), I can see how the developers aren't impressed much by the pitch. _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
