Why is Nvidia given GPL'd code to use in non-freedrivers?
On Sat, 04 Jan 2003 18:44:38 +0000, Richard Stallman wrote:
Richard, you are missing the entire point, again. You must understand that we all love free software and its benefits, that is why we all strive to make the Linux kernel a success. The problem is not everything is open source and if a proprietary application is just as good why not use it instead of wasting the time and effort of to create a clone? That seems to be all GNU is doing. Also as Larry McVoy introduced, developing programs cost money and you can't always make the money needed to do development costs. I do think it a good idea though that if you must make some proprietary for costs atleast OSS it afterwards. Frankly, some people don't care what they use. You're not going to change the world well actually you *have* in a way but you're not going to change the entire world.
Quoted 5 lines
You can't have freedom while using ClearCase, because it is non-free software. What we really need is a free replacement for it. Will people write one? Our main influence on whether people do this is by what we say. A strong Free Software Movement will inspire more people to reject non-free software and write free replacements.
Basicaaly all you say is that first line except fill ClearCase with any proprietary thing. The point is it makes no sense to clone something unless you're going to make it better, making it 'free' don't count. I am talking in features category. I understand our beliefs differ but I really wish you could stop being so determined (if that's a nice way to put it) and atleast except some of our decisions and beliefs as we pretty much have to deal with yours.
Quoted 6 lines
Allowing non-free modules (whether they are open-source or not) weakens the impetus for people to make free extensions to Linux. The general attitude Linux developers take towards non-free software also weakens it. Your own message, citing this gap in Linux, will tend to discourage people from working to close the gap.
Quoted 7 lines
All else being equal, I'm glad that you use a variant of the GNU system, but what system you use is not really important except to you. If you used HP-UX or Solaris, it would be your loss, not our community's loss. Spurring the broader development of free software should be higher priority than keeping you as a user.
I'm saying that if you truly have a just cause, you don't need a
hammer
Quoted 1 line
or a sickle to force people to see things your way. Intelligent
people
Quoted 13 lines
will have no choice but to follow your lead.
Since our views have little in common with Communism, it is remarkable that our enemies sometimes call us Communists. Perhaps they do this because it is easier to attack Communism than confront our real views.
It is the system of non-free software that resembles Stalinism. For more about this, see http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/why-free.html.
Visionaries should have faith in their own vision.
Real visionaries know that just having a vision does not change society. Sustained effort is necessary.
Signature · 3 lines
Steven [email protected] GnuPG Fingerprint: 9357 F403 B0A1 E18D 86D5 2230 BB92 6D64 D516 0A94
Richard, you are missing the entire point, again. You must understand that we all love free software and its benefits, that is why we all strive to make the Linux kernel a success. The problem is not everything is open source and if a proprietary application is just as good why not use it instead of wasting the time and effort of to create a clone?
The benefit of free software that I value is freedom to share the software, freedom to change it, freedom to cooperate with others in developing it. That's why, for me, the success of any particular kernel is not the most important thing--and why writing a free clone of a non-free program or system is hardly a waste.
Developing programs does not "cost money"--that is just one way to do it. But sometimes a person is in a position where he can develop a certain program only if he makes it non-free to raise money. If you are in such a position, unless you are going to make the program free software soon after, then the best thing you can do is not develop it at all. Someone else will develop a free program to do the job. Freedom is worth the wait.
Quoted 9 lines · Richard Stallman
Developing programs does not "cost money"--that is just one way to do it. But sometimes a person is in a position where he can develop a certain program only if he makes it non-free to raise money. If you are in such a position, unless you are going to make the program free software soon after, then the best thing you can do is not develop it at all. Someone else will develop a free program to do the job. Freedom is worth the wait.
Richard; this lovely view of life works great for (and not meaning to belittle anybody's work here) small/self contained/trivial projects, characterised by unix tools/apps which can be managed by one or a few people in a reasonable timescale. I mean grep, sed, bison, dhcpd, sendmail etc
But what about bigger projects? As stated previously, I develop computer games. It takes 30+ people 2-3years continous effort and $3M - 10$M in cash to produce.
This just isn't viable, under your model. A group of part time hobbyists just aren't gonna complete a (non trivial) game in their lifetimes.
You say "the best thing you can do is not develop it at all. Someone else will develop a free program to do the job."
I sincerely doubt it.
Sorry staff. Richard says you are all out of a job.
Richard; this lovely view of life works great for (and not meaning to belittle anybody's work here) small/self contained/trivial projects, characterised by unix tools/apps which can be managed by one or a few people in a reasonable timescale. I mean grep, sed, bison, dhcpd, sendmail etc
The GNU/Linux system is pretty large. For that matter, GCC and Linux are pretty large. So I think you're simply underestimating what we can do ethically, as an excuse for doing it the usual grabbing way.
But what about bigger projects? As stated previously, I develop computer games. It takes 30+ people 2-3years continous effort and $3M - 10$M in cash to produce.
I see no social need to be in such a hurry about it. I'd rather it were done more slowly and produced results that coexist with our freedom.
Meanwhile, people have already pointed out that there are ways to raise money for some kinds of free software projects. From what I hear about game product cycles, you might be able to make the game free after a year without losing much in sales.
But if that doesn't work for you, I would not consider it a great loss for the world if your products were not produced. They contribute something to the world if they are free software, but otherwise not.
Quoted 3 lines · Richard Stallman
But if that doesn't work for you, I would not consider it a great loss for the world if your products were not produced. They contribute something to the world if they are free software, but otherwise not.
In three lines, you have successfully summarized the exact position that some of us find unacceptable, or unrealistic in the world that we currently live in. This position is the position that I find to be incompatible with my belief system, and describes the exact conflict that we will not be able to resolve any time soon.
With this, I breath my last word in this thread.
Cheers!
mark
Signature · 9 lines
[email protected]/[email protected]/[email protected] __________________________ . . _ ._ . . .__ . . ._. .__ . . . .__ | Neighbourhood Coder |\/| |_| |_| |/ |_ |\/| | |_ | |/ |_ | | | | | | \ | \ |__ . | | .|. |__ |__ | \ |__ | Ottawa, Ontario, Canada One ring to rule them all, one ring to find them, one ring to bring them all and in the darkness bind them... http://mark.mielke.cc/
Quoted 5 lines · Richard Stallman
The GNU/Linux system is pretty large. For that matter, GCC and Linux are pretty large. So I think you're simply underestimating what we can do ethically, as an excuse for doing it the usual grabbing way.
Indeed. And the important large like gcc and glibc have substantial corporate sponsorship without which they would be dead in the water. Grabbing from the grabbers?
Quoted 6 lines
Meanwhile, people have already pointed out that there are ways to raise money for some kinds of free software projects. From what I hear about game product cycles, you might be able to make the game free after a year without losing much in sales.
So If I spend $X developing my game and then sell it closed with the stated intention of opening the source as soon as it has recouped a reasonable return on my investment, this would get your official seal of approval?
But isn't this exactly what Andre has been lambasted for? Perhaps you should step in and say a few words in his defence.
Quoted 3 lines
But if that doesn't work for you, I would not consider it a great loss for the world if your products were not produced. They contribute something to the world if they are free software, but otherwise not.
Perhaps not. But my 40 software developing staff are still going to be mightily pissed when I don't make payroll.
Richard, you started out with some noble priciples, but seem to have become a little confused somewhere along the way. The 'Don Quixote' hacker knight ;)
Quoted 6 lines · Andrew Walrond
Quoted 3 lines
But if that doesn't work for you, I would not consider it a great loss for the world if your products were not produced. They contribute something to the world if they are free software, but otherwise not.
Perhaps not. But my 40 software developing staff are still going to be mightily pissed when I don't make payroll.
Given that 90% of software development is reinventing the wheel (badly), perhaps 36 of them could move on to a career doing something useful.
Signature · 1 line
"Love the dolphins," she advised him. "Write by W.A.S.T.E.."
So If I spend $X developing my game and then sell it closed with the stated intention of opening the source as soon as it has recouped a reasonable return on my investment, this would get your official seal of approval?
Not quite. We can't count on this to result in free software.
1. An open source program may or may not be free software. I'd have to know what license you would use, and be sure it was a free software license, in order to expect that this would produce free software. (See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.html.)
2. There's no time limit. "As soon as it has recouped a reasonable return" could mean years from now, or never. As a result, even if you specify a specific free software license that you will use, we still can't count on this to make the package free software in any reasonable time.
If these two points were suitably changed, this becomes a plan that I might recommend to you if you were otherwise going to keep the software non-free and there were no better possibility. However, I could not recommend actually using the software while it is non-free.
But isn't this exactly what Andre has been lambasted for? Perhaps you should step in and say a few words in his defence.
I don't know what Andre plans to do. I find it difficult to read those messages--every sentence seems to have various interpretations. Maybe it violates the GPL, maybe it doesn't. Maybe it falls within the permission that the Linux developers have given for non-free modules. It seems to concern protocols I don't know anything about.
Since the issue does not concern the FSF directly, I don't need to try to figure it out. I am leaving the issue to others.
Perhaps not. But my 40 software developing staff are still going to be mightily pissed when I don't make payroll.
In a capitalist system, creation and loss of jobs are normal. Unemployment is normal too--and the level of unemployment is controlled by macroeconomic factors. To employ 40 people in one particular way cannot justify making a program non-free.
It is impossible to tell whether a world of free software would provide more employment or less employment. There is too much that we do not know.
Quoted 5 lines · Richard Stallman
So If I spend $X developing my game and then sell it closed with the stated intention of opening the source as soon as it has recouped a reasonable return on my investment, this would get your official seal of approval?
Quoted 7 lines
Not quite. We can't count on this to result in free software.
2. There's no time limit. "As soon as it has recouped a reasonable return" could mean years from now, or never. As a result, even if you specify a specific free software license that you will use, we still can't count on this to make the package free software in any reasonable time.
So if he specifies a specific future license (eg GPL, just to simplify things) and indicates what 'reasonable return' is (eg "a sale of 8,000 licenses" or some such) that would be ok......
Quoted 4 lines
If these two points were suitably changed, this becomes a plan that I might recommend to you if you were otherwise going to keep the software non-free and there were no better possibility. However, I could not recommend actually using the software while it is non-free.
....but you'd recommend that people not have the freedom to make their own price/value decisions AND (added bonus) actively work to PREVENT it ever becoming GPL'd.
User: "This [game/driver/database/...] is exactly what I need, and its only $50! Its worth way more than that to me, this rules."
RMS: "Sorry, you're not allowed to buy that. Just wait until it becomes free, then its all yours."
User: "Um.. ok. I need it pretty soon, and $50 is a great deal; it would cost me at least $2k and time I don't have to recreate it from scratch. When will it be free so I can use it?"
RMS: "Well... when a bunch of people piss me off and go buy it."
....
Heh. Hehehehe. So we're back to the "software developers are evil and should all starve to death" stance. Nifty. Thank [insert diety here] that you are working so hard to destroy your reputation; I'd hate to see the number of people following your edicts actually increasing..
Quoted 7 lines · Richard Stallman
Developing programs does not "cost money"--that is just one way to do it. But sometimes a person is in a position where he can develop a certain program only if he makes it non-free to raise money. If you are in such a position, unless you are going to make the program free software soon after, then the best thing you can do is not develop it at all. Someone else will develop a free program to do the job. Freedom is worth the wait.
Oh, but my backup can't just wait because the hard disk is likely to die before someone comes up with a free software that does better than Tivoli although this is sorta fragile on the systems I maintain. Are you going to sponsor for RAID-1 for the meanwhile, until the wait pays off?
Signature · 1 line
Matthias Andree
Quoted 10 lines · Matthias Andree
Quoted 7 lines · Richard Stallman
Developing programs does not "cost money"--that is just one way to do it. But sometimes a person is in a position where he can develop a certain program only if he makes it non-free to raise money. If you are in such a position, unless you are going to make the program free software soon after, then the best thing you can do is not develop it at all. Someone else will develop a free program to do the job. Freedom is worth the wait.
Quoted 5 lines
Oh, but my backup can't just wait because the hard disk is likely to die before someone comes up with a free software that does better than Tivoli although this is sorta fragile on the systems I maintain. Are you going to sponsor for RAID-1 for the meanwhile, until the wait pays off?
Well for a price you could back up around the world, and have unlimited amounts of storage per license and have unlimited (loads will limit the unlimited) clients and have interoporability today. But it is not free now, but stood a strong chance of happening in 6mo for the basics. The serious core costly features would take longer to recover. May 18mo of the next feature, and finally 36mo for the end game.
This is in flux now because ....
Cheers,
Andre Hedrick
LAD Storage Consulting Group
Quoted 18 lines · Andre Hedrick
Quoted 10 lines · Matthias Andree
Quoted 7 lines · Richard Stallman
Developing programs does not "cost money"--that is just one way to do it. But sometimes a person is in a position where he can develop a certain program only if he makes it non-free to raise money. If you are in such a position, unless you are going to make the program free software soon after, then the best thing you can do is not develop it at all. Someone else will develop a free program to do the job. Freedom is worth the wait.
Quoted 5 lines
Oh, but my backup can't just wait because the hard disk is likely to die before someone comes up with a free software that does better than Tivoli although this is sorta fragile on the systems I maintain. Are you going to sponsor for RAID-1 for the meanwhile, until the wait pays off?
Quoted 8 lines
Well for a price you could back up around the world, and have unlimited amounts of storage per license and have unlimited (loads will limit the unlimited) clients and have interoporability today. But it is not free now, but stood a strong chance of happening in 6mo for the basics. The serious core costly features would take longer to recover. May 18mo of the next feature, and finally 36mo for the end game.
This is in flux now because ....
Just in case: this was directed towards Richard Stallman, and was meant to convey the idea that free software of the future doesn't solve the problem I have today.
Andre, your efforts, ideas and projects are much appreciated, and I've seen them underestimated, and while I have often (in private, without telling anyone, luckily) suspected they wouldn't work out that well, they all proved me wrong and worked MUCH better than I expected.
Don't let your work get peed on by people who want you out of business or who don't recognize your achievements.
Signature · 1 line
Matthias Andree
To LKML:
I have nothing more to say on this issue.
Should anyone have more to say in contest, please ask for a mailing address and put it in writing. Otherwise, the comments are viewed as "I'm going to tell your mommy about it".
Regards,
Andre Hedrick, CTO & Founder
iSCSI Software Solutions Provider
http://<Advertising Line Deleted per Request>/
For those who have privately encourage and given permission, thank you.
Quoted 50 lines · Matthias Andree
Quoted 18 lines · Andre Hedrick
Quoted 10 lines · Matthias Andree
Quoted 7 lines · Richard Stallman
Developing programs does not "cost money"--that is just one way to do it. But sometimes a person is in a position where he can develop a certain program only if he makes it non-free to raise money. If you are in such a position, unless you are going to make the program free software soon after, then the best thing you can do is not develop it at all. Someone else will develop a free program to do the job. Freedom is worth the wait.
Quoted 5 lines
Oh, but my backup can't just wait because the hard disk is likely to die before someone comes up with a free software that does better than Tivoli although this is sorta fragile on the systems I maintain. Are you going to sponsor for RAID-1 for the meanwhile, until the wait pays off?
Quoted 8 lines
Well for a price you could back up around the world, and have unlimited amounts of storage per license and have unlimited (loads will limit the unlimited) clients and have interoporability today. But it is not free now, but stood a strong chance of happening in 6mo for the basics. The serious core costly features would take longer to recover. May 18mo of the next feature, and finally 36mo for the end game.
This is in flux now because ....
Just in case: this was directed towards Richard Stallman, and was meant to convey the idea that free software of the future doesn't solve the problem I have today.
Andre, your efforts, ideas and projects are much appreciated, and I've seen them underestimated, and while I have often (in private, without telling anyone, luckily) suspected they wouldn't work out that well, they all proved me wrong and worked MUCH better than I expected.
Don't let your work get peed on by people who want you out of business or who don't recognize your achievements.
Signature · 6 lines
Matthias Andree - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/