- Software should be free because it can enforce controls on people.
Is this what you meant or is there a typo ?
solutions to several people problems. I believe that this is more than a minor reason, it's the reason why free software works.
The four fundamental freedoms are the roots of all the side effects you mention ("the user is the developer", "more efficient development model"). Listing all the consequences of those four freedoms would be a hard job. Sorting them by order of importance is probably impossible. Depending on your perspective you may see one or the other as "the" most important. Since they do not exclude each other it does not really matter to find out.
My this is just a question of belief, but I don't believe that a single entity (FSMC) can represent either the diversity or the power of free software. I understand marketing has giving to people what they want or
I think the idea is that this company is much more like a nation (hence the declaration) than a company. In that sense it will represent the diversity of Free Software in the same way as France represents the diversity of the French culture.
Cheers,
On 26 May 2001 16:58:31 +0200, loic@gnu.org wrote:
- Software should be free because it can enforce controls on people.
Is this what you meant or is there a typo ?
This is the main point of the document at http://FreeDevelopers.net/press/whydecl/, that software should be free because it's more like law than literature because it can enforce what and how people can do things. It's one of the documents Ton refered me too.
My this is just a question of belief, but I don't believe that a single entity (FSMC) can represent either the diversity or the power of free software. I understand marketing has giving to people what they want or
I think the idea is that this company is much more like a nation (hence the declaration) than a company. In that sense it will represent the diversity of Free Software in the same way as France represents the diversity of the French culture.
My problem is that the company, as described now, goes against the 4 freedoms. It assumes that the company acts as the only distribution channel. I don't believe this can happen, even looking at it as a nation.
-- Joao Miguel Neves