I see, so same should be about CentOS. It's the same source code, but it's
not exactly the same team in charge.
an FAQ about Free software/Free culture values would be a nice addition in
Trisquel's documentation.
It's funny how my main spontaneous objections to free software are about
money. The usual stuff:
wouldn't that kill the drive to create better and better stuff?
Won't people pay a dime if it's available for free?
Won't people lose their jobs, in such a fragile current economy, etc.
I've read several answer to most of these, like studies showing that people
who share stuff spend more than those who don't, thus they end up rewarding
the author/artist/whatever,
or that changing for a more ethical job is a solution to consider (though not
everyone would risk that), etc.
In essence, I think my real objection is about getting one's reward stolen by
someone better at communicating that work, or with more funds shouldn't feel
like a good experience.
I think it happened with Angry Birds. I think it was "heavily inspired" by a
game with a Castle, of course very similar. It's like that Nike logo story as
well (though i think the author did fine anyway). Or Tesla.
That's not less ethical than proprietary software.
Right now I'm a bit stuck between both schools of thought.
I mean abuse can be a two-way street, with and without copyright, right?
I can imagine one possible answer: "that work doesn't belong to you anymore.
Be happy that someone made it proprietary and stole your reward". My mind is
maybe listening, but my heart is telling you that working my ass off for the
benefit of some douchebag stealing my life work is an injustice. and I'm not
talking about peer-to-peer here, since when people love the author's work,
usually they buy from him/her one way or the other.
I'm not talking about big companies either, though I know they are the ones
who benefit (and abuse) the most of copyright.
