I'm not trying to prove this--as I see it, Linus gave permission for
them, which means they are legal. I regret his decision to do this,
but I cannot change it.
But let's suppose that that were changed. It would not affect your
"freedom" to use Linux (and GNU/Linux), only whether it runs on a
certain computer. It is true that this might mean a practical
sacrifice--you might have to get a different kind of computer, for
instance. I don't see that as a horrible thing. We look for
computers that work with free drivers; you can too.
You don't really have freedom now, if you need a non-free module. In
the long run, your best chance of being able to use a fully free
GNU/Linux system on the hardware you use is if we stand firm together
for the freedom of the system.
If open source is so good, companies with closed source products will
I don't support the open source movement, but I know what they say
about this. They say that open source usually leads to more powerful
and reliable software. Nothing assures us that will persuade all
companies to adopt the practice. You have simplified their position
to a point where they would not recognize it.
You seem to be saying that we should sit back and let these inevitable
forces either convince all companies to make software free--or not.
If we had such a passive attitude, no free system would exist.
GNU/Linux exists because of people who were willing to work to have
freedom. Freedom does not yet prevail, and we have plenty more work
to do to make that happen. And after we fully have freedom, we will
still have to work, to make sure we don't lose it.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to firstname.lastname@example.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/