OK .. I heard Richard Stallman today

[alib_i]

well .. im quite new to this whole philosophy of free software
im sorry if im repeating a topic ( it's different for 'doubt in gnu gpl' thread )

ok ...
if a person has skills to (say) build a structure like a bridge or anything ...
then he can earn his living by SELLING his skills

if a person has skills to wonderfully paint ..
then he can earn his living by SELLING his paintings ..

then why the hell cant a person with skills of programming a good/useful software cant SELL the software.
and also keep the intellectual rights to the software with him.
wat is the problem if he earns royalty out of his work ...

now now now .. dont get into conclusions
i know free = freedom not free in sense price
wht i want to say is that .. price always comes into picture.
we cannot eliminate the need to earn money..

if i develop a software .. and i sell it at some price ..
and i also want it to be free software ( free in sense of freedom ) ..
so i want others to change/modify it .. to make it more useful ...
but how do i make sure i still earn money .. coz i want money to live

basically .. i aim to say that ..
y do u want all programers to do social service ..
if they have to be professionals .. they have to do it in a way that ensures that they earn money.

dont worry .. im not against all this GNU/GPL thingy..
but i think either its conflicting with my own ideas or i havent understood this philosophy properly..

____
alibi

[GNUrag]

Did you also meet Dr. Nagarjuna there? well, I work under him.!! I was also supossed to come there, but then i had to handle our office also

You should have asked all these question there itself instead of posting it here. You know you probably missed a golden opportunity!!

[alib_i]

Originally Posted by GNUrag

Did you also meet Dr. Nagarjuna there? well, I work under him.!! I was also supossed to come there, but then i had to handle our office also

You should have asked all these question there itself instead of posting it here. You know you probably missed a golden opportunity!!

I didnt meet Dr. Nagarjuna but I did saw him. He didnt come to stage but his presence was thanked by the organizing committee. He was very helpful.
And Im glad to know you work under him.

Now for questions ...
actually instead of direct questions we were asked to write our query in a piece of paper and Prof.Stallman gave answers
and poeple actually asked this question in writing .. and im not convinced by his answer.

____
alibi

[tuxfan]

alib_i, I share some of your concerns. Here's another thread where we have discussed some similar things.

Free vs. Prop. Software. Is free financially viable?
http://www.thinkdigit.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=7424

[klinux]

was a good story somewhere on how samba guy created samba and was able to earn a good if not gr8 living outta it . not a lot of people in india ask for payment for support of software , while most businesses depend heavily on support alone for financial perks

[alib_i]

@tuxfan ..
you got it right ... i was thinking in exactly same direction
i remember when the thread started .. but i never followed it coz i didnt had any particular views abt it ..
its the 1st time im starting to think over this ..

btw,
Prof.Stallman is a very energetic person ...
once during the lecture .. he stood up ..
wore a church-robe-kinda cloth over the neck and put an old hard disk as a halo over the head
and he said .. 'im a saint from the church of emacs .. we dont have gods here .. only have siants .. we only worship programmers'
that was very funny ..
and when one guy asked him that does he belive in god ..
he said 'no , im an atheist and the church of emacs IS a joke'
the guy's really cool

____
alibi

[teknoPhobia]

Seems lyk we attended the same seminar....
newayz... I do agree with stallman on one point...we should have the freedom to use the software as we wish and not only as the developer wants us to. The whole issue of Intellectual property and copyright is still pretty murky and in many ways is not in consonance with the avowed objective of copyright law...the advancement of arts and science...how can arts and science be advanced with the adoption of restrictive laws is beyond me.... The Indian copyright Act is a joke in many ways...at least thats what I gather from my course in IP law...even the jurisprudence is pretty inconsistent...look at most of the music industry litigations

[GNUrag]

Those who are from legal faternity will understand clearly the need for software freedom. Software code is Knowledge and Knowledge wants to be free.

All the claims about intellectual property and business secrets apply to material objects. We have to pay for basic things like Food and water because it is hard matter. By sharing Food and water, its quantity decreases hence there's a need to pay for the things which will vanish when it gets consumed.

Software is a different paridigm. Software is not a hard matter that can be conserved. It is inherently an intangible object. By sharing software, the software's utility does not decrease. One can copy software and create as many copies of the software as per the needs of the people. Restricting software sharing is in some ways voilating fundamental human rights.

Code sharing is basic to the existance of life. Every living being starts its life by sharing codes. Without sharing the DNA code among the different beings and species, life would not have existed and diversified.

[alib_i]

you are perfectly right in terms of morality and human rights and philosophical viewpoint

but from the practical viewpoint
if knowkledge had been completely free then all books must be free
all websites , all encypclopedias everything will be free.

but beyond a certain point .. you cant expect things to be free.
somebody who's worked day in and day out for creating some program should deserve the right to sell it.

i mean why should i always be a saint ...
we live in a competitive world .. the GNU's world seem to be a bit too idealistic to be practical

____
alibi

[GNUrag]

Originally Posted by alib_i

you are perfectly right in terms of morality and human rights and philosophical viewpoint but from the practical viewpoint

I am talking from a practical viewpoint only, not any kind of philosophical or idealistic viewpoint.

Originally Posted by alib_i

if knowkledge had been completely free then all books must be free all websites , all encypclopedias everything will be free.

Books are already free. You are free to share the Knowledge that you gain from reading the book. In a library, the readers are free to read whatever book they want to read. The knowledge that you gain from reading books does not carry any royalty and you are free to reproduce the knowledge that you gained from reading that book.

Encyclopedias are also free. The Wikipedia project < http://en.wikipedia.org > is today the biggest online encyclopedia in the world. You are Free to read the contents of that encyclopedia and you are free to edit its contents if you feel its contents are not up to mark.

When you purchare a book, you pay for:
1) The time author spent in writing his ideas in that book,
2) The cost of paper and binding,
3) And the printing/marketting resources that were involved to reproduce that book.

Books are material objects, and it is destructible in nature. Hence you have to pay for the book.

Originally Posted by alib_i

but beyond a certain point .. you cant expect things to be free.

Think Free as in Freedom. You will anyways have to pay to have a copy of software or get a copy of a hard-bound book.

Originally Posted by alib_i

somebody who's worked day in and day out for creating some program should deserve the right to sell it.

No one is stopping to sell one's software.

Consider this scenario.
There a company called MS. It makes a highly proprietary software product called MS-Office-XP. It hires 1000 who work full time with MS. Now, when they release their product, they need:
1) 10 Lakh people around the world who are involved in marketting, distribution of MS-Office-XP around the world.
2) 10 Lakh people around the world who are involved in on-site installation and configuration of MS-Office-XP around the world.
3) 10 Lakh people around the world who are involved in off-site/after sales help and support of MS-Office-XP around the world.

Now consider another company called SUN Microsystems. They make an OpenSource office application suite called OpenOffice 1.1 . They also have 1000 programmers working full time on OpenOffice. Plus some thousands other who also work on OpenOffice voluntarily in the form of porting OpenOffice. Now even if we do not consider the 1000 programmers, We still need those 30 Lakh people for marketting/installing/after-sales activities. And the major money is involved in that 3 activitiers only.

As you can see, Its just a matter of understanding that needs to be sorted out. rest all is absolutely fine.

Originally Posted by alib_i

i mean why should i always be a saint ... we live in a competitive world .. the GNU's world seem to be a bit too idealistic to be practical

In an idealistic world, one has to think about the past, and future also. With a proprietary software industry paradigm, everyone lives in today and is busy in making money as much as possible. By sharing code, we share our knowledge. Someone else might be in the world who might be an expert in some domain. If he is interested to improve the software written by us, then tell me who is going to benefit in the end?? think about it!!

[klinux]

" He is especially severe on Richard Stallman, the founder of GNU. "Richard Stallman is a capitalist"

u might like this guys

http://www.hindu.com/mp/2005/02/09/s...0900310400.htm

[teknoPhobia]

Intellectual Property is a good idea only upto a certain point. To what extent acn a person be expected to reap rewards? even if we say that an author should reap the rewards of his own work, it does not apply in case of any commercial program, b'coz the person who reaps the reward is the company and not the author. It cannot even be justified on the basis of a just return on investment...returns are completely out of proportion to the investment. The model proposed by Mr. stallman does provide an interesting alternative..even practical by most standards

[rachitar]

Hey he had come to our insti also on 10th of this month
He gave a good lec on patenting and the dangers if the patent laws are implemented in India.
We need to do something about this cause if the patent law is put into force,we all could be in big trouble

[DKant]

he said 'no , im an atheist and the church of emacs IS a joke'

Tch Tch! Will have to find his mail id somewhere and have a good long argument with him! lol.

As regards patents, see my siggy!

" He is especially severe on Richard Stallman, the founder of GNU. "Richard Stallman is a capitalist"

u might like this guys

http://www.hindu.com/mp/2005/02/09/s...0900310400.htm

Don't know how I missed that in print..but neway he oughtta have elaborated.

Now for questions...
actually instead of direct questions we were asked to write our query in a piece of paper and Prof.Stallman gave answers
and poeple actually asked this question in writing .. and im not convinced by his answer.

What was his answer?

And BTW, as regards royalty and all that, check out MLM in the free vs prop. s/w thread. But s/w that goes thru the MLM process won't be freeware according to Stallman's definition. So that's a prob we have to figure out.

[GNUrag]

Originally Posted by DKant

Tch Tch! Will have to find his mail id somewhere and have a good long argument with him! lol.

He is always accessible via this email that is, rms at gnu dot org