Question to Brett Glass

Brett Glass brett at
Thu Feb 14 16:42:10 CST 2002

At 12:02 PM 2/14/2002, Sylvain Petreolle wrote:
>The longer I read your posts on this mailing list,
>the more I think you don't like Open Source
>or Free projects. 

Not true. I'm very much in favor of a truly free
intellectual commons, and I'm very thankful for
the existence of code such as BSD and Apache.
But (L)GPLed code is neither open source nor
"free." That the FSF says otherwise cannot 
change this fact.

>You like commercial projects,
>with lawyers, profits and copy protection.

I do like some commercial products very much, and I
like the companies that make them to make profits
so that the products will continue to be improved.
I like coding for a living, and I do not want the 
FSF and its licenses to succeed in its agenda, which
consists of wiping out all commercial software and
destroying decent jobs for programmers.

On the other hand, I strongly support the notions
of fair use and the first sale doctrine, and I don't 
buy copy protected software. 

As for lawyers: Hiring them is sometimes a necessary 
expense (for example, if you're negotiating a
contract). But I wouldn't say that I "like" using

>Why don't you say that Linux is a sabotage of HP,IBM,
>Microsoft,(non-exhaustive list) OS providers ?

Anything that's GPLed throws a "monkey wrench" into
the relevant market, and (if it's any good) eventually
destroys all competition. GCC is  great example. It's
a mediocre compiler, but notably *better* compilers --
the ones I need for some of the work I do -- are not 

GCC was one of the very first FSF projects. The others,
as they progress, are beginning to have similar effects
on the markets which they have invaded. The progression
leads, inexorably, to the extinction of alternatives and
the elimination of user choice.

>Note that closed source programs are consuming time,
>employees,money... and are slowing the development.

I disagree. 

>> In short, Stallman urges programmers to sabotage
>> their employers' IP --
>> by injecting GPLed code into it -- so that it must
>> be given away.
>If I were a the boss of an ecologic team,
>I would urge my colleagues to respect the nature...
>Wouldn't you ? :-)

Yes. And the purpose of the GPL is to poison the well of
truly free software that existed long before Stallman 
founded the FSF. That ecology was balanced. The GPL
injects a "poison pill" designed to destroy the commercial
players, destroying the delicate symbiosis between commercial 
and freely available software.


More information about the wine-devel mailing list