On Saturday 29 September 2001 22:20, Matthew C. Weigel wrote: > The FSF and OSI distance themselves from one another politically, and > advocates of one over another disagree, but NO ONE says the things you > are ascribing to them.
Double checking to make sure I'm not getting signals crossed from an alternate reality... nope. Some RMS quotes from www.gnu.org [with my emphasis added]: "Years ago, free software developers noticed this discomfort reaction, and some started exploring an approach for _avoiding_ it. They figured that by _keeping_quiet_ about ethics and freedom, and talking only about the immediate practical benefits of certain free software, they might be able to ``sell'' the software more effectively to certain users, especially business." "At present, we have plenty of ``keep quiet'', but not enough freedom talk." "We are not against the Open Source movement, but we don't want to be _lumped_in_ with them." And some from a LTTE to DDJ, April 2001: "GNU is a part of the Free Software Movement and has _nothing_to_do_ with the Open Source Movement." "The Open Source Movement was founded in 1998 specifically to _reject_ our idealist philosophy. They cite _only_ practical advantages such as ''power, reliable software'' as the basis for everything they say, and studiously _avoid_ deeper issues such as freedom and principle." -- David Johnson ___________________ http://www.usermode.org -- license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3
