> Are you afraid that people are just going to go after features > rather than free software once they've been tempted? so you must > keep them ignorant. Plus, how does using GPL software educate > people about the GPL philosophy? Nobody can deny that a VAST > majority of the "F(/)OSS" community does not understand the difference > between free and open source software, let alone what GPL-free-as-in-speech > (for lack of a better term) is all about. All they know is > free-as-in-beer. Hell, even most of the big linux players don't > "get it."
I really wish people would stop using these free analogies. They are misleading and stupid. GPL licensed software = Gratis software (before you point out that some dictionaries use the word "free" as a synonym... remember in school when you had to pick the "best option"; that's what this is, the best word to describe something). ISC licensed software = Free software and let me quote some dictionary entries so that we all know what we are talking about: - exempt from external authority, interference, restriction, etc., as a person or one's will, thought, choice, action, etc.; independent; unrestricted. - able to do something at will; at liberty: free to choose. - exempt or released from something specified that controls, restrains, burdens, etc. (usually fol. by from or of): free from worry; free of taxes. - given without consideration of a return or reward: a free offer of legal advice. - not subject to special regulations, restrictions, duties, etc.: The ship was given free passage. - that may be used by or is open to all: a free market. There is no such thing as free beer. Someone, somewhere paid for production, distribution, etc etc. This is a stupid concept. Free as in speech as it is used has similar issues. The GPL license is full of legal restrictions and can therefore NOT be considered free speech. I can talk all day long on how free my license is (free speech) but it doesn't mean it is true. Where it falls apart is that the GPL enforces legal restrictions that limit free speech. So lets call it what it is; GPL software is gratis. RMS definitions of free/liberty/freedom etc are contorted to fit his believe system. They are not legal definitions and worse not even correct English. Got to love that the non-native speaker has to point that out. Do yourself a favor and stop listening to his stupid rhetoric.
