[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: FYI: GNU Emacs Manual to be moved to non-free

On Wed, May 14, 2003 at 11:48:31PM -0400, D.Goel wrote:

> FSF is one of organizations i would consider authorities on
> definitions of "freedom".

The FSF is authoritative on the FSF's definition of "freedom", Debian
is authoritative on Debian's definition.

> But just because DFSG does not agree with FSF on one point, does not
> mean you have to defeat the whole purpose of "free/unfree" separation
> by putting FSF's documentation nonfree. .

We're not.  We're putting the FSF's documentation in nonfree because
it doesn't meet our definition of free.  And speaking as a user, as
well as a Debian developer, I strongly agree with this decision.  I
can't use the documentation to produce a quick reference card for my
friends and family, I can't use it (as someone else pointed out) as a
source for comments in my code.  Basically, it's not free, period.  I
don't care what the FSF says, I don't care what Debian says, the
license does not meet MY definition of free!

> Calling FSF documentation itself unfree is like... never mind, i
> just can't think of anything.  In short, it's just ridiculous.

I think the word you're looking for is "blasphemous".  And frankly, I
don't care - the FSF is wrong in this case.  And I think it's a good
thing that Debian exists to provide checks and balances in discussions
of this sort.  Too many people accept the FSF's word without applying
any critical thought of their own.  I'd hate to be the only one
arguing that this documentation is non-free, because it clearly is.

> By forcing us to put "nonfree" in our sources.list, you are going to
> defeat the very purpose of the "nonfree" section for us.

That's the same argument that came from people who thought that
Netscape was free because it didn't cost any money.  Think about it.

> FSF and DFSG both watch out for our freedoms.

No, in this case, the FSF is not watching out for our freedoms.
They're attempting to restrict *my* freedoms in ways I find
unacceptable.  And I'm very happy that Debian is there to help save
the day.

> If one labels something as "free", that is good enough for me, the
> user.

I think that's the saddest thing I've ever read on this list.

Chris Waters           |  Pneumonoultra-        osis is too long
xtifr@debian.org       |  microscopicsilico-    to fit into a single
or xtifr@speakeasy.net |  volcaniconi-          standalone haiku

Reply to: