[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
Re: [school-discuss] Some questions about OSS in education:
----- Original Message -----
From: jeff williams <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 12:48:27 -0500
Subject: Re: [school-discuss] Some questions about OSS in education:
> On Sunday 15 August 2004 11:45 am, Daniel Taylor wrote:
> > Daniel Ajoy wrote:
> > > BTW, Why doesn't Stallman like the the word "pirate" applied
> > > to software?
> > because it is stupid to equate helping people with attacking a ship,
> > attacking a ship is bad, helping people (by giving software for
> > free) is good. Hence the dislike of the term.
> First off, OSS is, in my opinion, the way to go for a number of reasons. In
> this Stallman is correct, although he dislikes the name "Open Source."
> But, if I create a piece of software, investing my time and money and
> equipment so to make it work, and if I decide to sell the binary and keep the
> source as a secret, it is my creation to do with as I so desire. I have no
> moral obligation to take something which I created and give it away.
> If I choose to give the source to the community, with certain restrictions
> such as with the GNU Public License, that is also acceptable. I can
> determine what to do with that which I create.
> For me to use something that I have no permission to use is stealing or
> piracy. Even if I don't agree with the terms of usage but need the program,
> I can not take it on my terms. I don't have that right. If I have
> permission to use the program with certain restrictions -- such as under the
> GPL -- then I have the moral obligation to follow that license agreement.
> For moral reasons, especially the planned obsolescence of proprietary
> software, I do not choose to use it. Morally I believe the GPL and other
> open source licenses are more defensible, thus I choose to use open source
> I personally refuse to use Microsoft products. But where a shop or individual
> uses Microsoft products, I believe we must encourage them to act in
> accordance with both the spirit and the letter of the End User License
> Agreement. Indeed, we need to be so anal retentive about it, showing the
> absurdity of the EULA, that people will reject the products covered by the
> I am a school board member. I am insisting that we can prove that every piece
> of software is covered by a proper license. This means, because we have not
> used site licensing, that for each copy of Windows 95/98 which we run, we
> must have a proper certificate of authenticity and the proper EULA. If we
> can't do that, those computer systems can not be powered on. (Oh, let's just
> load Linux and open source software and be done with the problem.)
I'm reminded of the terms ubiquitous and pervasive, also homogenous and heterogenous. If it's the
air or fresh water I think that is a public matter. Piracy was significant in a sense of continuity
in my mind in that probably only pirates stood to no natural claims on drift (on tradgedy), if you
catch mine. Anyway I am also reminded of Jefferson's 'don't even denounce my separateness, and in times
of war you will be my enemy, and times of peace my friend ' if the "crisis" is that imperative, and
formed his framework for a true independence. Sorry if you don't care for rhettoric.
Find what you are looking for with the Lycos Yellow Pages