0
+ − 1 Copyright (C) 1985, 1993 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
+ − 2
+ − 3 Permission is granted to anyone to make or distribute verbatim copies
+ − 4 of this document, in any medium, provided that the copyright notice and
+ − 5 permission notice are preserved, and that the distributor grants the
+ − 6 recipient permission for further redistribution as permitted by this
+ − 7 notice.
+ − 8
+ − 9 Modified versions may not be made.
+ − 10
+ − 11 The GNU Manifesto
+ − 12 *****************
+ − 13
+ − 14 The GNU Manifesto which appears below was written by Richard
+ − 15 Stallman at the beginning of the GNU project, to ask for
+ − 16 participation and support. For the first few years, it was
+ − 17 updated in minor ways to account for developments, but now it
+ − 18 seems best to leave it unchanged as most people have seen it.
+ − 19
+ − 20 Since that time, we have learned about certain common
+ − 21 misunderstandings that different wording could help avoid.
+ − 22 Footnotes added in 1993 help clarify these points.
+ − 23
+ − 24 For up-to-date information about the available GNU software,
+ − 25 please see the latest issue of the GNU's Bulletin. The list is
+ − 26 much too long to include here.
+ − 27
+ − 28 What's GNU? Gnu's Not Unix!
+ − 29 ============================
+ − 30
+ − 31 GNU, which stands for Gnu's Not Unix, is the name for the complete
+ − 32 Unix-compatible software system which I am writing so that I can give it
+ − 33 away free to everyone who can use it.(1) Several other volunteers are
+ − 34 helping me. Contributions of time, money, programs and equipment are
+ − 35 greatly needed.
+ − 36
+ − 37 So far we have an Emacs text editor with Lisp for writing editor
+ − 38 commands, a source level debugger, a yacc-compatible parser generator,
+ − 39 a linker, and around 35 utilities. A shell (command interpreter) is
+ − 40 nearly completed. A new portable optimizing C compiler has compiled
+ − 41 itself and may be released this year. An initial kernel exists but
+ − 42 many more features are needed to emulate Unix. When the kernel and
+ − 43 compiler are finished, it will be possible to distribute a GNU system
+ − 44 suitable for program development. We will use TeX as our text
+ − 45 formatter, but an nroff is being worked on. We will use the free,
+ − 46 portable X window system as well. After this we will add a portable
+ − 47 Common Lisp, an Empire game, a spreadsheet, and hundreds of other
+ − 48 things, plus on-line documentation. We hope to supply, eventually,
+ − 49 everything useful that normally comes with a Unix system, and more.
+ − 50
+ − 51 GNU will be able to run Unix programs, but will not be identical to
+ − 52 Unix. We will make all improvements that are convenient, based on our
+ − 53 experience with other operating systems. In particular, we plan to
+ − 54 have longer file names, file version numbers, a crashproof file system,
+ − 55 file name completion perhaps, terminal-independent display support, and
+ − 56 perhaps eventually a Lisp-based window system through which several
+ − 57 Lisp programs and ordinary Unix programs can share a screen. Both C
+ − 58 and Lisp will be available as system programming languages. We will
+ − 59 try to support UUCP, MIT Chaosnet, and Internet protocols for
+ − 60 communication.
+ − 61
+ − 62 GNU is aimed initially at machines in the 68000/16000 class with
+ − 63 virtual memory, because they are the easiest machines to make it run
+ − 64 on. The extra effort to make it run on smaller machines will be left
+ − 65 to someone who wants to use it on them.
+ − 66
+ − 67 To avoid horrible confusion, please pronounce the `G' in the word
+ − 68 `GNU' when it is the name of this project.
+ − 69
+ − 70 Why I Must Write GNU
+ − 71 ====================
+ − 72
+ − 73 I consider that the golden rule requires that if I like a program I
+ − 74 must share it with other people who like it. Software sellers want to
+ − 75 divide the users and conquer them, making each user agree not to share
+ − 76 with others. I refuse to break solidarity with other users in this
+ − 77 way. I cannot in good conscience sign a nondisclosure agreement or a
+ − 78 software license agreement. For years I worked within the Artificial
+ − 79 Intelligence Lab to resist such tendencies and other inhospitalities,
+ − 80 but eventually they had gone too far: I could not remain in an
+ − 81 institution where such things are done for me against my will.
+ − 82
+ − 83 So that I can continue to use computers without dishonor, I have
+ − 84 decided to put together a sufficient body of free software so that I
+ − 85 will be able to get along without any software that is not free. I
+ − 86 have resigned from the AI lab to deny MIT any legal excuse to prevent
+ − 87 me from giving GNU away.
+ − 88
+ − 89 Why GNU Will Be Compatible with Unix
+ − 90 ====================================
+ − 91
+ − 92 Unix is not my ideal system, but it is not too bad. The essential
+ − 93 features of Unix seem to be good ones, and I think I can fill in what
+ − 94 Unix lacks without spoiling them. And a system compatible with Unix
+ − 95 would be convenient for many other people to adopt.
+ − 96
+ − 97 How GNU Will Be Available
+ − 98 =========================
+ − 99
+ − 100 GNU is not in the public domain. Everyone will be permitted to
+ − 101 modify and redistribute GNU, but no distributor will be allowed to
+ − 102 restrict its further redistribution. That is to say, proprietary
+ − 103 modifications will not be allowed. I want to make sure that all
+ − 104 versions of GNU remain free.
+ − 105
+ − 106 Why Many Other Programmers Want to Help
+ − 107 =======================================
+ − 108
+ − 109 I have found many other programmers who are excited about GNU and
+ − 110 want to help.
+ − 111
+ − 112 Many programmers are unhappy about the commercialization of system
+ − 113 software. It may enable them to make more money, but it requires them
+ − 114 to feel in conflict with other programmers in general rather than feel
+ − 115 as comrades. The fundamental act of friendship among programmers is the
+ − 116 sharing of programs; marketing arrangements now typically used
+ − 117 essentially forbid programmers to treat others as friends. The
+ − 118 purchaser of software must choose between friendship and obeying the
+ − 119 law. Naturally, many decide that friendship is more important. But
+ − 120 those who believe in law often do not feel at ease with either choice.
+ − 121 They become cynical and think that programming is just a way of making
+ − 122 money.
+ − 123
+ − 124 By working on and using GNU rather than proprietary programs, we can
+ − 125 be hospitable to everyone and obey the law. In addition, GNU serves as
+ − 126 an example to inspire and a banner to rally others to join us in
+ − 127 sharing. This can give us a feeling of harmony which is impossible if
+ − 128 we use software that is not free. For about half the programmers I
+ − 129 talk to, this is an important happiness that money cannot replace.
+ − 130
+ − 131 How You Can Contribute
+ − 132 ======================
+ − 133
+ − 134 I am asking computer manufacturers for donations of machines and
+ − 135 money. I'm asking individuals for donations of programs and work.
+ − 136
+ − 137 One consequence you can expect if you donate machines is that GNU
+ − 138 will run on them at an early date. The machines should be complete,
+ − 139 ready to use systems, approved for use in a residential area, and not
+ − 140 in need of sophisticated cooling or power.
+ − 141
+ − 142 I have found very many programmers eager to contribute part-time
+ − 143 work for GNU. For most projects, such part-time distributed work would
+ − 144 be very hard to coordinate; the independently-written parts would not
+ − 145 work together. But for the particular task of replacing Unix, this
+ − 146 problem is absent. A complete Unix system contains hundreds of utility
+ − 147 programs, each of which is documented separately. Most interface
+ − 148 specifications are fixed by Unix compatibility. If each contributor
+ − 149 can write a compatible replacement for a single Unix utility, and make
+ − 150 it work properly in place of the original on a Unix system, then these
+ − 151 utilities will work right when put together. Even allowing for Murphy
+ − 152 to create a few unexpected problems, assembling these components will
+ − 153 be a feasible task. (The kernel will require closer communication and
+ − 154 will be worked on by a small, tight group.)
+ − 155
+ − 156 If I get donations of money, I may be able to hire a few people full
+ − 157 or part time. The salary won't be high by programmers' standards, but
+ − 158 I'm looking for people for whom building community spirit is as
+ − 159 important as making money. I view this as a way of enabling dedicated
+ − 160 people to devote their full energies to working on GNU by sparing them
+ − 161 the need to make a living in another way.
+ − 162
+ − 163 Why All Computer Users Will Benefit
+ − 164 ===================================
+ − 165
+ − 166 Once GNU is written, everyone will be able to obtain good system
+ − 167 software free, just like air.(2)
+ − 168
+ − 169 This means much more than just saving everyone the price of a Unix
+ − 170 license. It means that much wasteful duplication of system programming
+ − 171 effort will be avoided. This effort can go instead into advancing the
+ − 172 state of the art.
+ − 173
+ − 174 Complete system sources will be available to everyone. As a result,
+ − 175 a user who needs changes in the system will always be free to make them
+ − 176 himself, or hire any available programmer or company to make them for
+ − 177 him. Users will no longer be at the mercy of one programmer or company
+ − 178 which owns the sources and is in sole position to make changes.
+ − 179
+ − 180 Schools will be able to provide a much more educational environment
+ − 181 by encouraging all students to study and improve the system code.
+ − 182 Harvard's computer lab used to have the policy that no program could be
+ − 183 installed on the system if its sources were not on public display, and
+ − 184 upheld it by actually refusing to install certain programs. I was very
+ − 185 much inspired by this.
+ − 186
+ − 187 Finally, the overhead of considering who owns the system software
+ − 188 and what one is or is not entitled to do with it will be lifted.
+ − 189
+ − 190 Arrangements to make people pay for using a program, including
+ − 191 licensing of copies, always incur a tremendous cost to society through
+ − 192 the cumbersome mechanisms necessary to figure out how much (that is,
+ − 193 which programs) a person must pay for. And only a police state can
+ − 194 force everyone to obey them. Consider a space station where air must
+ − 195 be manufactured at great cost: charging each breather per liter of air
+ − 196 may be fair, but wearing the metered gas mask all day and all night is
+ − 197 intolerable even if everyone can afford to pay the air bill. And the
+ − 198 TV cameras everywhere to see if you ever take the mask off are
+ − 199 outrageous. It's better to support the air plant with a head tax and
+ − 200 chuck the masks.
+ − 201
+ − 202 Copying all or parts of a program is as natural to a programmer as
+ − 203 breathing, and as productive. It ought to be as free.
+ − 204
+ − 205 Some Easily Rebutted Objections to GNU's Goals
+ − 206 ==============================================
+ − 207
+ − 208 "Nobody will use it if it is free, because that means they can't
+ − 209 rely on any support."
+ − 210
+ − 211 "You have to charge for the program to pay for providing the
+ − 212 support."
+ − 213
+ − 214 If people would rather pay for GNU plus service than get GNU free
+ − 215 without service, a company to provide just service to people who have
+ − 216 obtained GNU free ought to be profitable.(3)
+ − 217
+ − 218 We must distinguish between support in the form of real programming
+ − 219 work and mere handholding. The former is something one cannot rely on
+ − 220 from a software vendor. If your problem is not shared by enough
+ − 221 people, the vendor will tell you to get lost.
+ − 222
+ − 223 If your business needs to be able to rely on support, the only way
+ − 224 is to have all the necessary sources and tools. Then you can hire any
+ − 225 available person to fix your problem; you are not at the mercy of any
+ − 226 individual. With Unix, the price of sources puts this out of
+ − 227 consideration for most businesses. With GNU this will be easy. It is
+ − 228 still possible for there to be no available competent person, but this
+ − 229 problem cannot be blamed on distribution arrangements. GNU does not
+ − 230 eliminate all the world's problems, only some of them.
+ − 231
+ − 232 Meanwhile, the users who know nothing about computers need
+ − 233 handholding: doing things for them which they could easily do
+ − 234 themselves but don't know how.
+ − 235
+ − 236 Such services could be provided by companies that sell just
+ − 237 hand-holding and repair service. If it is true that users would rather
+ − 238 spend money and get a product with service, they will also be willing
+ − 239 to buy the service having got the product free. The service companies
+ − 240 will compete in quality and price; users will not be tied to any
+ − 241 particular one. Meanwhile, those of us who don't need the service
+ − 242 should be able to use the program without paying for the service.
+ − 243
+ − 244 "You cannot reach many people without advertising, and you must
+ − 245 charge for the program to support that."
+ − 246
+ − 247 "It's no use advertising a program people can get free."
+ − 248
+ − 249 There are various forms of free or very cheap publicity that can be
+ − 250 used to inform numbers of computer users about something like GNU. But
+ − 251 it may be true that one can reach more microcomputer users with
+ − 252 advertising. If this is really so, a business which advertises the
+ − 253 service of copying and mailing GNU for a fee ought to be successful
+ − 254 enough to pay for its advertising and more. This way, only the users
+ − 255 who benefit from the advertising pay for it.
+ − 256
+ − 257 On the other hand, if many people get GNU from their friends, and
+ − 258 such companies don't succeed, this will show that advertising was not
+ − 259 really necessary to spread GNU. Why is it that free market advocates
+ − 260 don't want to let the free market decide this?(4)
+ − 261
+ − 262 "My company needs a proprietary operating system to get a
+ − 263 competitive edge."
+ − 264
+ − 265 GNU will remove operating system software from the realm of
+ − 266 competition. You will not be able to get an edge in this area, but
+ − 267 neither will your competitors be able to get an edge over you. You and
+ − 268 they will compete in other areas, while benefiting mutually in this
+ − 269 one. If your business is selling an operating system, you will not
+ − 270 like GNU, but that's tough on you. If your business is something else,
+ − 271 GNU can save you from being pushed into the expensive business of
+ − 272 selling operating systems.
+ − 273
+ − 274 I would like to see GNU development supported by gifts from many
+ − 275 manufacturers and users, reducing the cost to each.(5)
+ − 276
+ − 277 "Don't programmers deserve a reward for their creativity?"
+ − 278
+ − 279 If anything deserves a reward, it is social contribution.
+ − 280 Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society
+ − 281 is free to use the results. If programmers deserve to be rewarded for
+ − 282 creating innovative programs, by the same token they deserve to be
+ − 283 punished if they restrict the use of these programs.
+ − 284
+ − 285 "Shouldn't a programmer be able to ask for a reward for his
+ − 286 creativity?"
+ − 287
+ − 288 There is nothing wrong with wanting pay for work, or seeking to
+ − 289 maximize one's income, as long as one does not use means that are
+ − 290 destructive. But the means customary in the field of software today
+ − 291 are based on destruction.
+ − 292
+ − 293 Extracting money from users of a program by restricting their use of
+ − 294 it is destructive because the restrictions reduce the amount and the
+ − 295 ways that the program can be used. This reduces the amount of wealth
+ − 296 that humanity derives from the program. When there is a deliberate
+ − 297 choice to restrict, the harmful consequences are deliberate destruction.
+ − 298
+ − 299 The reason a good citizen does not use such destructive means to
+ − 300 become wealthier is that, if everyone did so, we would all become
+ − 301 poorer from the mutual destructiveness. This is Kantian ethics; or,
+ − 302 the Golden Rule. Since I do not like the consequences that result if
+ − 303 everyone hoards information, I am required to consider it wrong for one
+ − 304 to do so. Specifically, the desire to be rewarded for one's creativity
+ − 305 does not justify depriving the world in general of all or part of that
+ − 306 creativity.
+ − 307
+ − 308 "Won't programmers starve?"
+ − 309
+ − 310 I could answer that nobody is forced to be a programmer. Most of us
+ − 311 cannot manage to get any money for standing on the street and making
+ − 312 faces. But we are not, as a result, condemned to spend our lives
+ − 313 standing on the street making faces, and starving. We do something
+ − 314 else.
+ − 315
+ − 316 But that is the wrong answer because it accepts the questioner's
+ − 317 implicit assumption: that without ownership of software, programmers
+ − 318 cannot possibly be paid a cent. Supposedly it is all or nothing.
+ − 319
+ − 320 The real reason programmers will not starve is that it will still be
+ − 321 possible for them to get paid for programming; just not paid as much as
+ − 322 now.
+ − 323
+ − 324 Restricting copying is not the only basis for business in software.
+ − 325 It is the most common basis because it brings in the most money. If it
+ − 326 were prohibited, or rejected by the customer, software business would
+ − 327 move to other bases of organization which are now used less often.
+ − 328 There are always numerous ways to organize any kind of business.
+ − 329
+ − 330 Probably programming will not be as lucrative on the new basis as it
+ − 331 is now. But that is not an argument against the change. It is not
+ − 332 considered an injustice that sales clerks make the salaries that they
+ − 333 now do. If programmers made the same, that would not be an injustice
+ − 334 either. (In practice they would still make considerably more than
+ − 335 that.)
+ − 336
+ − 337 "Don't people have a right to control how their creativity is
+ − 338 used?"
+ − 339
+ − 340 "Control over the use of one's ideas" really constitutes control over
+ − 341 other people's lives; and it is usually used to make their lives more
+ − 342 difficult.
+ − 343
+ − 344 People who have studied the issue of intellectual property rights
+ − 345 carefully (such as lawyers) say that there is no intrinsic right to
+ − 346 intellectual property. The kinds of supposed intellectual property
+ − 347 rights that the government recognizes were created by specific acts of
+ − 348 legislation for specific purposes.
+ − 349
+ − 350 For example, the patent system was established to encourage
+ − 351 inventors to disclose the details of their inventions. Its purpose was
+ − 352 to help society rather than to help inventors. At the time, the life
+ − 353 span of 17 years for a patent was short compared with the rate of
+ − 354 advance of the state of the art. Since patents are an issue only among
+ − 355 manufacturers, for whom the cost and effort of a license agreement are
+ − 356 small compared with setting up production, the patents often do not do
+ − 357 much harm. They do not obstruct most individuals who use patented
+ − 358 products.
+ − 359
+ − 360 The idea of copyright did not exist in ancient times, when authors
+ − 361 frequently copied other authors at length in works of non-fiction. This
+ − 362 practice was useful, and is the only way many authors' works have
+ − 363 survived even in part. The copyright system was created expressly for
+ − 364 the purpose of encouraging authorship. In the domain for which it was
+ − 365 invented--books, which could be copied economically only on a printing
+ − 366 press--it did little harm, and did not obstruct most of the individuals
+ − 367 who read the books.
+ − 368
+ − 369 All intellectual property rights are just licenses granted by society
+ − 370 because it was thought, rightly or wrongly, that society as a whole
+ − 371 would benefit by granting them. But in any particular situation, we
+ − 372 have to ask: are we really better off granting such license? What kind
+ − 373 of act are we licensing a person to do?
+ − 374
+ − 375 The case of programs today is very different from that of books a
+ − 376 hundred years ago. The fact that the easiest way to copy a program is
+ − 377 from one neighbor to another, the fact that a program has both source
+ − 378 code and object code which are distinct, and the fact that a program is
+ − 379 used rather than read and enjoyed, combine to create a situation in
+ − 380 which a person who enforces a copyright is harming society as a whole
+ − 381 both materially and spiritually; in which a person should not do so
+ − 382 regardless of whether the law enables him to.
+ − 383
+ − 384 "Competition makes things get done better."
+ − 385
+ − 386 The paradigm of competition is a race: by rewarding the winner, we
+ − 387 encourage everyone to run faster. When capitalism really works this
+ − 388 way, it does a good job; but its defenders are wrong in assuming it
+ − 389 always works this way. If the runners forget why the reward is offered
+ − 390 and become intent on winning, no matter how, they may find other
+ − 391 strategies--such as, attacking other runners. If the runners get into
+ − 392 a fist fight, they will all finish late.
+ − 393
+ − 394 Proprietary and secret software is the moral equivalent of runners
+ − 395 in a fist fight. Sad to say, the only referee we've got does not seem
+ − 396 to object to fights; he just regulates them ("For every ten yards you
+ − 397 run, you can fire one shot"). He really ought to break them up, and
+ − 398 penalize runners for even trying to fight.
+ − 399
+ − 400 "Won't everyone stop programming without a monetary incentive?"
+ − 401
+ − 402 Actually, many people will program with absolutely no monetary
+ − 403 incentive. Programming has an irresistible fascination for some
+ − 404 people, usually the people who are best at it. There is no shortage of
+ − 405 professional musicians who keep at it even though they have no hope of
+ − 406 making a living that way.
+ − 407
+ − 408 But really this question, though commonly asked, is not appropriate
+ − 409 to the situation. Pay for programmers will not disappear, only become
+ − 410 less. So the right question is, will anyone program with a reduced
+ − 411 monetary incentive? My experience shows that they will.
+ − 412
+ − 413 For more than ten years, many of the world's best programmers worked
+ − 414 at the Artificial Intelligence Lab for far less money than they could
+ − 415 have had anywhere else. They got many kinds of non-monetary rewards:
+ − 416 fame and appreciation, for example. And creativity is also fun, a
+ − 417 reward in itself.
+ − 418
+ − 419 Then most of them left when offered a chance to do the same
+ − 420 interesting work for a lot of money.
+ − 421
+ − 422 What the facts show is that people will program for reasons other
+ − 423 than riches; but if given a chance to make a lot of money as well, they
+ − 424 will come to expect and demand it. Low-paying organizations do poorly
+ − 425 in competition with high-paying ones, but they do not have to do badly
+ − 426 if the high-paying ones are banned.
+ − 427
+ − 428 "We need the programmers desperately. If they demand that we stop
+ − 429 helping our neighbors, we have to obey."
+ − 430
+ − 431 You're never so desperate that you have to obey this sort of demand.
+ − 432 Remember: millions for defense, but not a cent for tribute!
+ − 433
+ − 434 "Programmers need to make a living somehow."
+ − 435
+ − 436 In the short run, this is true. However, there are plenty of ways
+ − 437 that programmers could make a living without selling the right to use a
+ − 438 program. This way is customary now because it brings programmers and
+ − 439 businessmen the most money, not because it is the only way to make a
+ − 440 living. It is easy to find other ways if you want to find them. Here
+ − 441 are a number of examples.
+ − 442
+ − 443 A manufacturer introducing a new computer will pay for the porting of
+ − 444 operating systems onto the new hardware.
+ − 445
+ − 446 The sale of teaching, hand-holding and maintenance services could
+ − 447 also employ programmers.
+ − 448
+ − 449 People with new ideas could distribute programs as freeware, asking
+ − 450 for donations from satisfied users, or selling hand-holding services.
+ − 451 I have met people who are already working this way successfully.
+ − 452
+ − 453 Users with related needs can form users' groups, and pay dues. A
+ − 454 group would contract with programming companies to write programs that
+ − 455 the group's members would like to use.
+ − 456
+ − 457 All sorts of development can be funded with a Software Tax:
+ − 458
+ − 459 Suppose everyone who buys a computer has to pay x percent of the
+ − 460 price as a software tax. The government gives this to an agency
+ − 461 like the NSF to spend on software development.
+ − 462
+ − 463 But if the computer buyer makes a donation to software development
+ − 464 himself, he can take a credit against the tax. He can donate to
+ − 465 the project of his own choosing--often, chosen because he hopes to
+ − 466 use the results when it is done. He can take a credit for any
+ − 467 amount of donation up to the total tax he had to pay.
+ − 468
+ − 469 The total tax rate could be decided by a vote of the payers of the
+ − 470 tax, weighted according to the amount they will be taxed on.
+ − 471
+ − 472 The consequences:
+ − 473
+ − 474 * The computer-using community supports software development.
+ − 475
+ − 476 * This community decides what level of support is needed.
+ − 477
+ − 478 * Users who care which projects their share is spent on can
+ − 479 choose this for themselves.
+ − 480
+ − 481 In the long run, making programs free is a step toward the
+ − 482 post-scarcity world, where nobody will have to work very hard just to
+ − 483 make a living. People will be free to devote themselves to activities
+ − 484 that are fun, such as programming, after spending the necessary ten
+ − 485 hours a week on required tasks such as legislation, family counseling,
+ − 486 robot repair and asteroid prospecting. There will be no need to be
+ − 487 able to make a living from programming.
+ − 488
+ − 489 We have already greatly reduced the amount of work that the whole
+ − 490 society must do for its actual productivity, but only a little of this
+ − 491 has translated itself into leisure for workers because much
+ − 492 nonproductive activity is required to accompany productive activity.
+ − 493 The main causes of this are bureaucracy and isometric struggles against
+ − 494 competition. Free software will greatly reduce these drains in the
+ − 495 area of software production. We must do this, in order for technical
+ − 496 gains in productivity to translate into less work for us.
+ − 497
+ − 498 ---------- Footnotes ----------
+ − 499
+ − 500 (1) The wording here was careless. The intention was that nobody
+ − 501 would have to pay for *permission* to use the GNU system. But the
+ − 502 words don't make this clear, and people often interpret them as saying
+ − 503 that copies of GNU should always be distributed at little or no charge.
+ − 504 That was never the intent; later on, the manifesto mentions the
+ − 505 possibility of companies providing the service of distribution for a
+ − 506 profit. Subsequently I have learned to distinguish carefully between
+ − 507 "free" in the sense of freedom and "free" in the sense of price. Free
+ − 508 software is software that users have the freedom to distribute and
+ − 509 change. Some users may obtain copies at no charge, while others pay to
+ − 510 obtain copies--and if the funds help support improving the software, so
+ − 511 much the better. The important thing is that everyone who has a copy
+ − 512 has the freedom to cooperate with others in using it.
+ − 513
+ − 514 (2) This is another place I failed to distinguish carefully between
+ − 515 the two different meanings of "free". The statement as it stands is
+ − 516 not false--you can get copies of GNU software at no charge, from your
+ − 517 friends or over the net. But it does suggest the wrong idea.
+ − 518
+ − 519 (3) Several such companies now exist.
+ − 520
+ − 521 (4) The Free Software Foundation raises most of its funds from a
+ − 522 distribution service, although it is a charity rather than a company.
+ − 523 If *no one* chooses to obtain copies by ordering the from the FSF, it
+ − 524 will be unable to do its work. But this does not mean that proprietary
+ − 525 restrictions are justified to force every user to pay. If a small
+ − 526 fraction of all the users order copies from the FSF, that is sufficient
+ − 527 to keep the FSF afloat. So we ask users to choose to support us in
+ − 528 this way. Have you done your part?
+ − 529
+ − 530 (5) A group of computer companies recently pooled funds to support
+ − 531 maintenance of the GNU C Compiler.
+ − 532
