spaf@cs.purdue.EDU (Gene Spafford) (06/01/89)
As Karl has suggested in another article, everyone flaming on this
topic should step back and try to cool down -- it's not that big a
deal, and it isn't worth angry words. For some of you that's
difficult, because you have an emotional investment in the GNU project
(and possibly a time or money committment as well), and others may
have a financial committment in their computing hardware (for
instance, a Mac II). It's difficult to see both sides if you're
heavily involved.
I don't claim to be impartial, nor do I claim extraordinary vision,
but I do think some things are being overlooked or misinterpreted.
And I know for sure that flaming back and forth in a newsgroup or
mailing list never resolves any points of contention -- it merely
escalates.
1) Karl summed it up nicely -- nobody "owns" the newsgroup or the
mailers. Anybody can send mail to any address or post to any
newsgroup their machine gets. The control comes about in deciding
what, if anything to gateway between mail and news, and what if
anything to forward. Claiming to "own" either is silly; the best you
can do is claim some element of control. Exercising that control can
be time and effort-consuming, but that's true of most things in life.
If the GNU folks decide to change how distribution or gatewaying work,
they can.
2) Apple was instrumental in the development of cheap personal
computers, and that may be more important in the long run than
anything the hackers at MIT ever did. Maybe. Neither institution is
likely to disappear anytime soon, however, and both are assured of
significant footnotes in the history books. It's important not to
forgot that Apple's role in producing the "volkscomputer" has, in some
ways, enabled this whole discussion to take place.
3) I doubt many people are buying Macs for A/UX -- the Mac OS and
applications are why people buy Macs, coupled with price and reputation
for quality. (Aside: we bought A/UX with out Macs a year or so ago,
and after 2 fun-filled weeks deleted it from all our disks and refused
to pay for it -- it was AWFUL. We would never recommend it to
anyone. Quality seems to apply to the Mac OS and hardware only.)
4) Stop confusing Apple the company with employees of Apple. Not
everyone at Apple agrees with company policy...unfortunately, many of
them aren't in a position to change company policy. And unless you're
willing to offer them a suitable job, pension, etc, don't suggest they
quit Apple in protest. Moral decisions are great when you aren't
the one in the middle, with a family to support.
4a) Don't assume you know the motives of all the players in the game.
Attack David Berry for work he's done on his own time under the terms
of the GNU general license is petty and makes you look bad. You
cannot say that his efforts are designed to support Sun in their
efforts (and that's not to say they aren't, either). However,
stooping to impugn other's intents and actions can only lower the
opinions of observers. Steve VanDevender made some good comments on
this in his article, too.
4b) Everybody using GNU software should realize that the purpose of
that software is not technical in nature -- it's political. RMS
admitted that here just a few postings back. There are implications
there that users should think through before going gung-ho into the
ranks of the GNU'ers. (I'm having serious second thoughts about GNU
software, and the attitude of some FSF'ers in all this only heightens
my concern. More on that in another article.) One shouldn't join the
skinheads because they have the best parties, nor should one join the
ACLU just because Bush doesn't like them. RMS & others claim if you
buy Apple equipment you are making a political statement; by the same
token, you are making a statement if you use GNU software. Be sure
that you agree with whatever statement you are making.
5) Intellectual property laws are rooted in our legal tradition and
established in both common law and the Constitution. If you're
serious about changing the way those work, you should be working
within the system to do something about it. File friend-of-the-court
briefs in the look-and-feel lawsuits. Write to state & federal
legislators explaining why the laws as they are currently written are
a bad thing. Write some articles in well-circulated journals
explaining your position. Stage a letter-writing campaign to the
president of Apple. Posting to the mailing list, or producing a
compiler that a few thousand home hobbyists use is not going to
influence the courts a whole hell of a lot...or the lawyers.
--
Gene Spafford
NSF/Purdue/U of Florida Software Engineering Research Center,
Dept. of Computer Sciences, Purdue University, W. Lafayette IN 47907-2004
Internet: spaf@cs.purdue.edu uucp: ...!{decwrl,gatech,ucbvax}!purdue!spafshap@polya.Stanford.EDU (Jonathan S. Shapiro) (06/01/89)
I have seen the suggestion to file friend of the court briefs twice now. I don't know how to go about doing it, but would be willing to if I could. Perhaps the most effective thing to do, if it were possible, wouldbe to swap the courts with such briefs... Can someone tell us how to go about filing such a thing? Jon
frank@croton.DEC.COM (Frank Wortner) (06/01/89)
In article <9631@polya.Stanford.EDU>, shap@polya.Stanford.EDU (Jonathan S. Shapiro) writes: > > I have seen the suggestion to file friend of the court briefs twice > now. I don't know how to go about doing it, but would be willing to > if I could. Perhaps the most effective thing to do, if it were > possible, wouldbe to swap the courts with such briefs... No, no, no! A large number of poor briefs would have little or no effect on the court. Harrassing the court will get nowhere. One reasoned, though out argument is more effective. The only thing swamping the court will do is waste time and postage stamps. Frank