Re: non-free and users?
"Sergey V. Spiridonov" <email@example.com> writes:
> Sven Luther wrote:
>>> If developer agrees with such a limitation he is not able to modify
>>> this program to help his friend to adapt it for his
>>> needs. Developer will not be able to distribute modifications to
>>> others who also need such an improvenment. This contradicts human
>>> ethics, because help is ethical.
>> Yeah sure, whatever. Please tell me how this developer would be better
>> able to help this friend, if the orinal work is not available at all. In
>> either case, he can start from scratch, and reimplement the program in a
>> free fashion, and thus help his friend.
> If the original work is not available at all, developer will not be
> able to act non-ethical.
> > Also, notice that this same argument can be hold against your
> > argument. If we can help someone by providing non-free packages, and
> > that their licence allow them to use it, is it not counter-ethical for
> > us to not distribute such non-free package ?
> If we have something to distribute and we reject to help people who
> need it, it is not ethical.
So when some ask me to distribute the ocaml-doc package because they
need it, and I refuse, it is not ethical ? so we must not drop
non-free, or it will be non ethical.
> But if we drop this something (erase,
> delete, burn), we will not act non-ethical anymore when someone
> request it from us.
But we will act non-ethical when we Will drop it, because there people
who need it know, as it is, with no modification.