From: burley@wookumz.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Craig Burley) Subject: Re: GNU Public license and the future of Linux... Date: 15 Jun 1993 13:52:19 GMT
In article <1viivrINN950@no-names.nerdc.ufl.edu> kem@prl.ufl.edu (Kelly Murray) writes:
What I get hot and bothered about is the claim put forward by GPL proponents
that it provides a better way for a better world, with the corresponding
hostility towards business and profits, and a lack of understanding of the
free market. There are other chances to create profitable businesses
without using free software. Investment will just go elsewhere, where
there is less risk and more chance for success. That is the sense of
the GPL robbing us all, since less resources get applied to GPL'd work
that could be used to create better products.
My observation, as a fan of the GPL with lots of friends who also are fans,
is that GPL proponents are generally _not_ hostile towards business and
profits -- in fact most or all of them are enjoying getting in on the
ground floor of the vast, untapped business potential that GPL-protected
software represents. Nobody who understands economics and software can
look at the history to date of the GPL and GPL-protected software and
pretend that it doesn't hint at significant opportunities for profit.
Rather, it is people who are already hostile towards business and profits
who intrude upon those of us who support the GPL and claim we're
capitalist pigs for trying to sell GPL software. These people often
pretend to be defenders of the GPL, but typically display a complete lack
of factual knowledge regarding the actions and beliefs of those involved
in _creating_ the GPL and most GNU software.
Please don't confuse these two groups!
As far as "the GPL robbing us all", that is just plain garbage. It is
_always_ the case that when there are alternatives people are free
to choose among, "resources" will get distributed among them:
Of course, free-market competition is not always the best way, either, but
as a general philosophy I think it holds up pretty well.
You said it, and I agree. Of course, if you buy this, you shouldn't
sucker yourself into believing the existence of the GPL or GPL-protected
code somehow robs resources, either: away from free software (as you appear
to claim); or to free software and away from proprietary software (as
most other GPL-haters claim). The free market is _about_ allowing people
to direct resources as they see fit -- one should not see the availability
of another service as a "resource robber" as you characterize the GPL
(in a sense directly opposite what most GPL-haters claim), rather as
another classic example of the free market at work.
And keep in mind that if we had a _truly_ free market here in the USA,
_all_ software would be public domain. It's government protectionism
that creates, maintains, and enforces copyright law (protectionism we
all pay for in the form of taxes), and in particular allows that
law (fairly recently, circa the 1970's I think) to be applied to
computer software. Other industries (such as fashion, typeface design,
and so on) have little or no intellectual-property law (copyright or
patent) serving to protect the designer, yet the flourish to degrees
appropriate for the nature and market of their products.
GPL supporters tend to believe far _more_ in the free market than
detractors, though the detractors rarely recognize this. I know
I believe more in the free market than anyone I know who rejects
the GPL in the current US legal environment (again, if everything
were normally PD, then the GPL would represent leftist leanings,
not rightist as it actually does in today's climate). And I understand
software design lifecycles well enough, I think, to understand why
the GPL is better for end users than _either_ PD or proprietary
software, and thus better for those who, like myself, provide services
to such users.
I do know that if I wanted to rip off a bunch of unsuspecting users,
in a way only somewhat more clever than some proprietary-software
developers, I'd use PD software to do it. But I wouldn't touch the
GPL with a ten-foot pole because of the risks involved (the courts
might well rule that my methods of ripping people off were actually
intended to rip people off). No, I won't go into details of how I
would do this, no need to give people good ideas for ripping off
others, but just a little creative thought on the part of anyone who
understands the PD software market and software in general should
suffice.
Ok, I admit I went overboard on Craig Burley. Let me state for the record
that I had never seen anyone previously refer to Craig Burley as "Mr.
Flame", and I do not wish my comment to convey any information regarding
the programming talents of Mr. Burley.
Thank you for the sincere apology. You appear to be in a rather tiny
and elite group of USENET posters who actually is willing and able to
admit doing something wrong and apologize for it. Totally accepted.