On Sun, May 09, 1999 at 04:26:20AM -0600, Richard Stallman wrote: > I don't see much difference in practice between these three cases: > (1) Communicating with a site running a proprietary server package. > (2) Communicating with a site running a GPL-covered server package > with private modifications that have not been released (something > that the GPL permits). > (3) Communicating with a site running a free server package > that operates on data not available anywhere else.
How about these three cases:
(1) Communicating using an undocumented and overly complicated
protocol, to talk to some server for which no free alternative
exists, which furthermore makes use of patented or secret
techniques to perform its task.
(2) Communicating using a documented and widely publicised protocol
to talk to a server for which no free alternative currently
exists.
(3) Communicating using a protocol for which there's a Debianised server
packaged in main.
In particular, in the first case, the provider of the proprietry server
has complete control over your use of the GPLed client -- they can charge
for connections to their server, they can firewall you out because they
don't like what you said about them on a newsgroup, whatever they like.
You can't even write a drop-in replacement for their server -- you can
at best start from scratch and write your own client that works with
your server.
In the second, your easiest recourse is to write a replacement if you
don't like what they've done. At least that's *doable*.
In the third case, if you don't like what they're doing you can just run
your own server.
To be a little more concrete: what's stopping me from writing a library
that is otherwise free, but can only do anything while communicating with
a server of mine. Perhaps I have some image manipulation algorithms that
I don't want to publicise. So I write this library, and it has function's
like "render3dimage" which turn out -- even in spite of network latency
and bandwidth issues -- to be better than most of the other available
stuff and even better it's completely free!
So of course, people start installing Debian and finding this way cool
library people have been talking about and using it to produce 3d worlds
and everything.
But then I find myself out of work for a couple of months and the bills
start piling up, and I look over in the corner and think to myself: hey,
why don't I just start charging for connections to my renderserver? So
I do. Sure .edu sites get a bit for free, and I've got sliding scales
for home use, and stuff, but at least I can eat again. But of course some
stupid gits have to start calling my a proprietry software producing
scum, and tell me I'm just abusing the community for my own profit and
whatever else. I become the new RedHat, so to speak. So I get pissed and
I start firewalling a bunch of the gits from my site.
So we eventually get to a state where, sure, you've got this GPLed
library and a whole bunch of GPLed apps based on it, but it's all
completely useless unless you (a) pay me money, and (b) don't complain
and get on my blacklist. You can't write an alternative, and you can't
run an alternative.
I don't think software like this belong in the GNU operating system,
personally, and I also don't think it belong in Debian.
Cheers,
aj, who doesn't see what's so important about whether it's on your computer
or someone else's if it restricts your freedom.
--
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. PGP encrypted mail preferred.
``Smart, sexy, single. Pick any two (you can't have all three).''
-- RFC 1925, paraphrased: a guide to networking in the '90s
pgp0czBT5xzM5.pgp
Description: PGP signature
