OFB Community Mailing Lists

[Timothy R. Butler]

> I have NOT acknowledged that it actually DOES perpetuate freedom 
> though.
> To the contrary.  If A writes some software from scratch, he has the
> right to do whatever he wishes with it.  He can sell or release it as a
> proprietary package, he can sell or release it as a more open package,
> he can keep it and use it himself.  These are his rights.  Lets suppose
> he has listened to RMS's hype and he releases it under the GPL.  Now
> lets say that developer B gets ahold of the software and improves it.
> He has less rights than A did.  He can sell it as an open product or
> release it for free as an open product, or keep it to himself.  He
> cannot however, sell it or release it as a proprietary product.  The


	Basically this is an issue of a republic versus anarchy or even 
democracy. Any functional "democratic" government in existence is 
really a republic, as I'm sure everyone knows. Now, the founders could 
have crafted a "BSD-style" government that allowed anything and 
everything. That would be called anarchy. And you can bet it wouldn't 
have lasted. Just like a BSD licensed software, soon someone would come 
in and make the country proprietary (a dictatorship) or different parts 
of the country would split up with incompatible restrictions (perhaps I 
couldn't move from my city to the suburb 30 miles away because they 
have a restriction that requires one to sell everything and buy new 
stuff from them).

	A democracy is also a problem since it leads to mob rule. The rule of 
law goes out the window because the majority will always oppress the 
minority given the chance, carving out exceptions for themselves.

	A republican form of government works best for preserving freedom not 
because it is the "freest" system but because it will provide the most 
freedom. If the United States lasted ten years in anarchy or two and a 
quarter centuries in a republic, which system provided the most 
freedom? I think it is fair to say, far more people were free under a 
republic because it can last. A BSD licensed program, if useful, will 
almost certainly start heading toward becoming proprietary at some 
point. Therefore, maximal amounts of free users (even less free than 
"anarchic freedom") will never be achieved. A GPL'ed program insures 
that every single person who ever uses the program will have the rights 
the author intended.

	-Tim

---------------------------------------------------------------
Timothy R. Butler       Universal Networks      www.uninet.info
==================== <tbutler at uninet.info> ====================
| Christian Portal:      | Have you not learned great lessons |
|      www.faithtree.com | from those  who  braced themselves |
| GNU/Linux News:        | against  you   and   disputed  the |
|            www.ofb.biz | passage with you?   --Walt Whitman |
---------------------------------------------------------------
Presently on "Albert" (DP PPC 970 "G5" running at 2.0 GHz)