Linux laptops, revisited (can any sleep like my PowerBook does?)

[Lonnie Olson]

Levi Pearson wrote:
> Is it selfish of architects to not give away the plans to their
> buildings for free?  Is it selfish of silicon manufacturers to not
> give away their netlists for free?  I don't see why Free Software
> people think that code is so special that it ought to be free by
> default to the point where people who *don't* free their code are
> somehow being nasty, rude, and anti-social.

Here you go again talking about price.  Trying to muddy the waters some 
more.  This issue isn't about price at all.

Is it completely unreasonable to *pay* an architect for his hard work, 
and ask for a copy of the plans.  No.  In fact it happens fairly regularly.

> Software, hardware, and support used to be sold as a package.
> Software typically came with the source code, though you didn't get
> the right to resell modifications.  It stands to reason that the same
> model would work on commodity hardware.  I think (and hope) that
> restricting access to the source is a temporary abberation in the
> history of software, but I support the right of software creators to
> do it if they wish.

Again, missing the point.  It's not about restricting the rights of 
software creators to release non-free software.  It's about showing the 
world the other way, to get the freedom to use their software, to share 
their software, to modify their software, etc.

It's a bit like freedom of speech.  You are perfectly in your right to 
lie, be rude to, or swear at people in the street.  But it isn't very 
nice.  Everyone already knows to stay away from these people.  Free 
Software is about teaching people to stay away from non-free software 
for similar reasons.

--lonnie