[pp.int.general] Significance of use of Free and proprietary software in a political context

[Ray Jenson]

Richard M Stallman wrote:
>     Personally, I think that it's perfectly healthy to have competition  
>     between Free and proprietary software,
>
> To speak of competition between freedom and subjugation is to assume
> subjugation is morally acceptable.
>   
This is the classic problem between the concept for free vs. freedom... 
one connotes price, the other connotes choice. I think it's healthy to 
have competition between free (price) software and for-pay software; I 
think it's reprehensible to prevent healthy competition by hiding custom 
code from others. It doesn't create a competitive atmosphere, it creates 
an atmosphere of contention.

I agree with rms in that proprietary software is subjugation of a 
computer; however, I disagree that free software always connotes freedom 
(as implied by the response). Free software (as in freedom) is not 
always free. There isn't a high degree of moral acceptability for 
subjugated software if your aim is to free people from the idea that 
they have to protect their work.

What we do have to protect is the attribution. This means that software 
should never have a patent, and should be protected under copyright, as 
with any written work. It's not enough to simply eliminate the patent 
for software; we have to ensure that people have a say in how they are 
attributed, and if they are attributed at all. It's equally 
reprehensible to take credit for something you didn't do.