On Wed, 26 May 2010 07:32:58 -0500 Marco Peereboom <sl...@peereboom.us> wrote:
> That free beer analogy has never made any sense and never will. I > honestly wonder why people keep repeating it. > Yes. One of my pet peeves. Free from **wut ? But I do think the BSD model best supports the interests of Liberty, and that's a bond that makes men less to be free of ;-) Dhu > On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 12:32:56PM +0100, Peter Kay (Syllopsium) wrote: > >> From: "Julian Acosta" <j.acost...@gmail.com> > >> Hello! > >> > >> I'm from the Postgraduate Departmen of the ITCC University from Mexico, > >> > >> Really we need to contact with Richard Stallman, just for give us his > >> opinion and answer us some questions about free software, > >> How can I contact him? > >> What's his real email? > > You'd be better contacting the FSF rather than Stallman directly - don't you > > think that's overkill? > > > > He also may have conducted just one or two interviews and written a couple > > of articles - just google. > > > > Bear in mind that their favoured GPL 'free' software license is not free. > > It is > > effectively free as in beer, but not as in free speech[1]. Their definition > > includes being forced to give away source code, which whilst I understand > > the viewpoint (of increasing free code), is by any measure a restriction of > > your freedom. > > > > BSD licenses, on the other hand, do not restrict what you can do, > > although it's > > good karma to contribute back when using a large amount of free code from > > others. > > > > [1] The GPL allows products to be sold, but seeing as this must include > > source code, after one sale it only needs someone with a compiler to > > distribute > > it freely (as in beer). > > > > Peter
