|
|
|
|
|
|
by roenxi
534 days ago
|
|
|
> Okay but like, who cares. People who care about freedom. The question answers itself. If the person writing the software is laying down the law about how it is going to be used then, as a simple and practical matter, the user is being denied freedom. If code can't be used for business purposes it is a bit of stretch to say it is free software. We may as well call pirated software free software if we're being that loose with language that we only mean price; people don't pay for it either. The "free" stands for freedom. > Then why complain that they excercise that freedom. They've just legally given up all the coercive options, so the only tool left is complaint. That is one of the major points of the whole thing - for everyone to have the most freedom communities have to try and resolve disputes by clear communication, vocalising concerns, argument and persuasion. Although I think you've misread KingMob's comment. Exactly what they meant is open to interpreting, but what they actually said isn't a complaint. "Free-riders" is a technical term for what most FOSS software users are doing. It might be explicitly endorsed by the software maintainer but it is still free-riding. |
|
|
My previous comment on this was unclear.
The very act of complaining about it betrays the idea that it's "freedom".
Either companies have the freedom to take without giving back, in which case forcing them to buy the software breaks those freedoms, but you shouldn't complain.
Or they do not have the freedom, in which case just sell the software normally.