> Also, why it's ethical not to write the program at all (giving users > _no_ freedom to do anything)
Because proprietor is not ‘giving’ or ‘presenting’ freedoms to users, he is *returning* it. Naturally users do have their essential rights, it’s a copyright law that takes them away, establishing a _monopoly_ for the benefit of an author or (which is more likely) an author’s employer. Thus, a free software supporter would argue that a moral duty of an ethical proprietor is to deny to accept socially harmful privileges and return users their essential rights back. > but unethical to write it and then not GPL it. There are many other ethical (that is free) software licences besides GNU GPL. Three (or four) of them are other GNU licences, by the way. _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
