Name: Anonymous 2017-06-20 15:12
I am writing to protest the recent article "All software should be free, software developer maintains" [CW, Dec. 24] in which Richard Stallman was given a platform to propound his advocacy of "free software" and the abolition of copyrights.
One need ask Stallman only one question to understand why he endorses such a vague concept as free software. How will software produers live if not by selling the fruits of their labors?
Stallman knows the answer - by government subsidy. You can bet Stallman, spoiled by government-funded academic research programs, longs for the day his kind can dictate the course of the software industry from some ivory tower in Washington D.C.
Stallman claims that the arts and sciences progress "most quickly when people build on each other's work." Yet, how does this work of others come into being in the first place? Does Stallman honestly believe in effects without causes?
No. Stallman's position is an act of moral cowardice to evade the fact that science progresses precisely by the discoveries of independent minds pursuing their own goals and interests. Stailman denies the existence of independent men in order to defend by unspoken implication his own vices — dependence and parasitism.
Allow me to quote the U.S. Constitution on the subject of progress in the arts and sciences: "The Congress shall ... promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writing and Discoveries."
Stallman's assertions that anyone who will not subordinate his life and work to the unearned benefit of others is an "enemy of society" and that trade is an "offense" to the traders are the type of totally fallacious misconceptions one would expect to see editorialized in some third rate Marxist tabloid.
Stallman's feeling of "shame" when using the products of software companies reveals a fundamental hatred for the pride of the creators of these products, and consequently, a hatred for man's highest faculty, his creative mind. There is no more evil doctrine, and no "golden rule" will ever justify it.
This man brazenly proposes to "interfere as much as [he] can with other people's attempts to interfere with the sharing of software." In other words, he In-tends to obstruct enforcement of the copyright laws. Obstruction of Justice, which Stallman apparently doesn't realize, is a felony.
In closing. I vow to seek every legal remedy from this man should he ever steal any of my company's software products.
-- Thomas A. Murphy, Roseville, Mich.
One need ask Stallman only one question to understand why he endorses such a vague concept as free software. How will software produers live if not by selling the fruits of their labors?
Stallman knows the answer - by government subsidy. You can bet Stallman, spoiled by government-funded academic research programs, longs for the day his kind can dictate the course of the software industry from some ivory tower in Washington D.C.
Stallman claims that the arts and sciences progress "most quickly when people build on each other's work." Yet, how does this work of others come into being in the first place? Does Stallman honestly believe in effects without causes?
No. Stallman's position is an act of moral cowardice to evade the fact that science progresses precisely by the discoveries of independent minds pursuing their own goals and interests. Stailman denies the existence of independent men in order to defend by unspoken implication his own vices — dependence and parasitism.
Allow me to quote the U.S. Constitution on the subject of progress in the arts and sciences: "The Congress shall ... promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writing and Discoveries."
Stallman's assertions that anyone who will not subordinate his life and work to the unearned benefit of others is an "enemy of society" and that trade is an "offense" to the traders are the type of totally fallacious misconceptions one would expect to see editorialized in some third rate Marxist tabloid.
Stallman's feeling of "shame" when using the products of software companies reveals a fundamental hatred for the pride of the creators of these products, and consequently, a hatred for man's highest faculty, his creative mind. There is no more evil doctrine, and no "golden rule" will ever justify it.
This man brazenly proposes to "interfere as much as [he] can with other people's attempts to interfere with the sharing of software." In other words, he In-tends to obstruct enforcement of the copyright laws. Obstruction of Justice, which Stallman apparently doesn't realize, is a felony.
In closing. I vow to seek every legal remedy from this man should he ever steal any of my company's software products.
-- Thomas A. Murphy, Roseville, Mich.