[pp.int.general] Why Free Software misses the point

[Fedor Khod'kov]

Ole Husgaard <pirat at sparre.dk> writes:
> FSF is recommending copyleft, and this includes an obligation to share
> the source code when modified copies are distributed in binary form. So
> you can say that FSF is preaching for an obligation to share.
>
> But Boris is missing an important point: This is something you only have
> to accept if your work is based on (a derivative of) works created by
> others requiring this. If your work is entirely your own, you cannot be
> bound by such an obligation.

Copyleft currently can be applied only to software which is released
under copyleft license, and indeed cannot bind anybody who releases her
own work.  But that doesn't mean FSF is against requiring software
source code to be disclosed, at least after some time.  See, for example
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/pirate-party.html.  And, apart from legal
requirements, FSF recommends people not to use non-free software,
including software without publicly available source code.

There is a good reason to demand software source code to be available to
its users: to control their computers people should know what their
software is doing, and they also should have the ability to fix and
improve it if needed; I don't know any reasonable objection against such
a demand.
-- 
Fedor.