You are incorrect. Under the GPL you can sell your software, but you must provide the source code to anyone that buys the software, and request the source. You don't even have to provide the source code until they ask for it. Note that you don't have to provide the source code to anyone that does not buy the software, which is another misconception I have seen in print.
-----Original Message----- From: Jay Maynard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, January 05, 2004 9:25 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Anyone Nagios? On Mon, Jan 05, 2004 at 09:06:10AM -0800, Fargusson.Alan wrote: > Jay, you didn't say why you think that RMS is not for freedom for > programmers. Am I correct in assuming that you think programmers want to > keep their source code secret? No. RMS is for freedom for programmers only if they subscribe to his utopia, where all programs are freely available. If you're a programmer who wants to make money off of programming, he wants nothing to do with you, and doesn't think your freedoms are worth protecting. Some programmers want the freedom to reap the fruits of their labors, unhindered by idealism. > If you read the book "Free as in freedom" you will see that RMS has taken > such a hard line on the GPL is that he wants programmers to have freedom. > To RMS this means that no software should be secret. He wants programmers to have his kind of freedom. Unfortunately, that is not freedom, because it does not apply to programmers who want the freedom to sell their work. True freedom must necessarily include the freedom to do things that make others angry, or else it is a hollow shell. RMS's idea of freedom is that kind of hollow, and that is why I reject the very idea that he should be allowed to redefine the word "freedom" as he desires.
