<br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">Why should we chastise people for choice, a abillity we hold so highly<br>
in the FOSS community. If people want to use close source OS and apps,<br>
so be it. How do we have the right to dictate to people?<br>
<br></blockquote></div><br>I write .NET code on Windows machines for my day job, I write Python at home on Linux and I run Symbian on my mobile etc. I'd probably have a Mac if I wasn't paying for a wedding :)<br>
<br>The reason I use free software at home is not because of any political conviction but because I think free software has a more vibrant community (Could you imagine a Windows User Group?). Moreover, I think that free software is more programmer friendly and higher quality than most closed source software. The best arguments for free software have always been technical, not political.<br>
<br>A certain element of the free software movement rail against copyright because they think it restricts freedom. However, this is quite an ironic position. You see, copyright is <i>about</i> freedom. If copyright did not exist there would be nothing to stop Microsoft lifting code from the Linux kernel and shipping it in their product. The GPL <i>requires</i> the existence of copyright in order to prevent this.<br>
<br>I believe in these freedoms:<br><ol><li>An author should be free to release code under any license they choose.</li><li>An author should be able to control the distribution of derivative works. <br></li><li>A user should be able to choose which software they want to use.<br>
</li></ol>I actually think the existing set-up we have with copyright works quite well. It provides enough flexibility to allow the Microsoft's of the world to co-exist with GNU. Without the first two freedoms in my list, neither Microsoft or GNU could exist. It's pretty impressive that two diametrically opposed organisations can rely on the same legal principles for their existance.<br>
<br>I don't think the end-game of the free software movement should be to end closed source software. They are part of the software ecology just as much as GNU/Linux. Our goal should be promote free software as a platform for furthering the development of the computer revolution. <br>
<br>Kind Regards,<br><br>Simon Johnson<br><br>