Ubuntu is not free.

[meets at free.fr]

On Sat, 8 Jul 2006 14:21:33 +0200
"Adriano Varoli Piazza" <moranar at gmail.com> wrote:

> 2006/7/8, meets at free.fr <meets at free.fr>:
> > On Sat, 8 Jul 2006 13:09:16 +0200
> > "Adriano Varoli Piazza" <moranar at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > You don't get to say what I as a user want or do not want, need
> > > or do not need. Please don't assume everyone agrees with you,
> > > even on this matter.
> > Hello,
> > You are a free software user, and the Ubuntu distribution pretends
> > to be a free software.
> 
> That's as may be. I am a software user and a programmer. Don't presume
> that just because I use Ubuntu I think this or that way, don't put
> words in my mouth, and don't try to represent me without my consent.
> If your point is valid, I'll embrace it.
> 
> Ubuntu includes plenty of software that isn't exactly licensed as
> "free", though it's licensed under other open source licenses, or in
> the public domain. Get that straight. It even includes some software
> that is not free, under certain repositories, as do most distributions
> in one way or another. Just because it's not on the CD doesn't mean
> it's less important.
> 
> Understand that I would agree with your points, but not presented
> like this.
Hello,
I understand perfectly, and so I'll try to make it more clear :
Let me remind what's the definition of free software, at least for the
persons who believe that it's a matter of price : free as in freedom,
and not free as something you don't have to pay for.

You can send a gift with paypal to most free software developpers, you
can contribute in many ways, and offer part of your time to improve it,
to translate, or whatever you are able and available to do. So, you
'pay' for it if you like. You can also do neither of theses, as the
free access to the source code makes the software available for no
money. But, the free software definition lies at first on the source
code free access and free redistribution.

Ubuntu seems to rely on GPL, as defined here :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GPL

and affirms that it's free software :
http://www.ubuntu.com/

"These freedoms make Ubuntu fundamentally different from traditional
proprietary software: not only are the tools you need available free of
charge, you have the right to modify your software until it works the
way you want it to."

To Dick Davis, I don't only want to stay free (and I've been using
Ubuntu for many months now), but I want to talk true when I tell
people they should try _this_ free Operating System that can complete
or replace their Windows.
Ubuntu developpers ought to choose : remove the non free software away
from the kernel, or write their own free license, and add it to the
distribution. 
Ubuntu is human, friendly, it should also be honest.
Best greetings, Joyce Markoll.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-users/attachments/20060708/0cf9963e/attachment.sig>