* Akira Urushibata <a...@wta.att.ne.jp> [2022-01-31 16:09]:
> We tell people: "It's free as in freedom, not as in free beer."  While
> I don't object to this slogan, I must point out that in reality, the
> vast majority of free software users get it for free, without paying
> anything for it.

The reason why majority of users get it without paying is because that
is what is offered.

I never found it problematic to pay for free software. I would be
paying for free software. 

Many Free OS websites do not have clear way to pay. They have
donations, so I sometimes donate. However, it is not enough exposed or
demonstrated how to pay. 

My first encounter was with RedHat Linux, so I did pay to somebody who
was selling their CD-ROM. When I have visited them, I have even got
their packages for free as I was promoting free software at the time
before the year of 2000.

Today, various Linux based OS-es are built into various devices sold
on the market, that is also one way of "paying":

Other references where Linux based OS is sold:



Majority of free software is offered on VPS-es sold worldwide to VPS

Those companies selling free software like RedHat also do
contributions to free software. But it is not the must. 

My point is that I would pay for free software, that is what I was
used to, but it is simply not offered for sale.

Let me give you example on GNU website:

There is table with free GNU/Linux distributions. In that same table
one could provide methods of payment, be it Bitcoin or any other
method of payment. But there is no option for payment, and I do not
mean it for sale, but for some kind of donation. Donations are
available straight to FSF.

I would say that payment buttons could be incorporated in
websites. Question is yet if free software payment by credit card
works without non-free Javascript.

In general, if anybody wants to get paid, well, prepare yourself
commercially and ask people for payment.

In Germany free software is sold on shells of the computer malls. Some
people pay for free software that way.

I would even be ordering USB sticks, DVD-ROMs with Operating Systems
and software. I would be ordering nice manuals for vocational school,
like design with GIMP or similar.

Problem is that there is few offers on the market.

> When you get something for free, you are supposed to say thanks.


> With free software, many people fail to do that.

I would not be harsh on users that way. And how do you know it?
Majority of countrie in the world have some kind of "thanks" or
acknowledgment. You are making drama out of nothing. 

If there is no person involved in transmission of a product, then
there is no person to hear "thank you". As simple as that. You
download software from server and you have nobody to tell "thank you".

But guess what, instead of that, if you are satisfied you will tell
your friends to use that free software and where they can download
it. That is other way of saying "thank you" as that will bring more
people into free software community, there will be more contributions,
and there will be some of those people donating to various
organizations, like FSF.

> I fear lack of gratitude, in wholehearted emotion as well as outward
> expression, will have consequences.

I think that is very much personal issue. It is far from objectivity.

> It's rude not to say thanks.

It is also rude to put blame on majority of unknown of computer users
and accuse them to be rude for not saying thank you where there was
nobody alive to be told to during the transmission of software.

> Some people try to justify rudeness with claims like this: "This
> isn't sophisticated.  It didn't take much skill or effort to make.
> It's not important."

Which people? Do you have a reference? Is it so important? There is
plethora of discussions online about this or that software. 

You have to learn how to live with it. And this is your problem, it is
definitely not general problem of software developers. It is specific
personal problem.

> If this is not accurate, it can lead to trouble for those affected,
> including the good-willed author who released his work under a free
> license.

That author who is affected has to read the free software license and
to decide if that is for him or not. 


Take action in Free Software Foundation campaigns:

In support of Richard M. Stallman

Reply via email to