Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+willy=40w.ods.org@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id <S267651AbTACUXW>; Fri, 3 Jan 2003 15:23:22 -0500
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org
	id <S267653AbTACUXW>; Fri, 3 Jan 2003 15:23:22 -0500
Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]:54465 "EHLO
	fencepost.gnu.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id <S267651AbTACUWi>; Fri, 3 Jan 2003 15:22:38 -0500
From: Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
To: andre@linux-ide.org
CC: mark@mark.mielke.cc, billh@gnuppy.monkey.org, paul@clubi.ie,
       riel@conectiva.com.br, Hell.Surfers@cwctv.net,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
In-reply-to: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10301021953430.421-100000@master.linux-ide.org>
	(message from Andre Hedrick on Thu, 2 Jan 2003 20:38:12 -0800 (PST))
Subject: Re: Why is Nvidia given GPL'd code to use in closed source drivers?
Reply-to: rms@gnu.org
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10301021953430.421-100000@master.linux-ide.org>
Message-Id: <E18UYTG-0004yu-00@fencepost.gnu.org>
Date: Fri, 03 Jan 2003 15:31:10 -0500
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1486
Lines: 32

    What I see is a lot of people wait for new technology to be supported,
    yet do nothing to enable the ones who have access and are willing to take
    the risks of dealing with the vendors who are paranoid.

Yes, that is a shame.  How can we change that?  We have to spread the
word through our community that encouraging and rewarding Nvidia is
self-destructive until they cooperate with our freedom.

    What if they decide to thumb the nose at you?

I believe that is what they are doing now.  (Please correct me
if I'm wrong--I would be glad to hear it.)

    What if they decide to withdraw their drivers?

We would not lose any free software that way, and it might increase
the impetus for people to work improving on the free drivers.  In the
long run, this would be for the best.

    If people want to use "non-free drivers", they choose to execute the
    freedom to do so.  Now, what is clearly stated in your text is, FREEDOM
    means the vendor of the "non-free drivers" has NONE!

Making a program non-free is denying other people the freedom to
study, change and/or redistribute it.  It is an act of domination.  To
speak of the "freedom" to dominate others is to stretch the concept of
freedom into a Russell paradox.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/