Re: [tlug] linux in Japanese schools

[Jean-Christophe Helary <fusion@example.com>]

On 7 janv. 07, at 11:14, Curt Sampson wrote:

> It seems to me that you must grant further rights, beyond what you  
> were
> given. You not only must give the end-user all of the GPL'd code, but
> also give him for free and grant him rights to redistribute any of  
> your
> code that links to this GPL'd code.

You can buy or sell Debian CDs, Debian installed computers, services  
around Debian if you want. The code and the media that carries it do  
not have to be free of charge.

The free software world in not an a-economic world. Free software is  
at the very base of the computer-centered economy of the last 30 years.

The fact that software has become a commodity is something that is  
totally unrelated to the necessity of having free software to make  
the economy run.

> So, for example, if I spend ten years writing a large, complex
> million-line application, and then link GNU readline into it before
> selling someone a binary, they then have the right to demand the  
> source
> code for that entire application, and they can redistribute it freely.

If you have spend 10 years trying to develop a application and  
realize the necessity and implications of linking to GNU readline at  
the end of the tenth year it means you maybe should have chosen  
gardening instead of programming.

There are other ways to have equivalent functions and you can use a  
non-GNU proprietary library in your app if you feel inclined to do  
so. Noody forces you to use readline.

Freeing software is a political move to refuse to make code a simple  
commodity, and places code at a much higher level: common knowledge  
for the benefit of all. It is a very important and profound concept.  
The decision to GPL code is a very strong statement _against_ the  
commodification of intellectual work.

Also, I think GPL is a very good way to resist the computer pop- 
culture that Alan Kay refers to in his interviews.

Jean-Christophe Helary