Re: [aclug-L] Free software and warez

[JOHNSTONE JEREMY S <jsjohnst@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

I don;t think I could have said it better myself, or in a longer fashion
%;-)

Jeremy

On 10 Sep 1998, John Goerzen wrote:

> Wesley Simon <wsimon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> 
> > I'm not aware of anyone's position on cracks, hacks and warez, but I
> > believe that in order to mature, the group should adopt some
> > zero-tolerance attitudes of such behavior.  I used to think it was cool,
> 
> OK, you have hit on a prime topic of interest for me.  I love talking
> about this, so I suspect I'll be a bit verbose, but hey.
> 
> Let's split up those things because they are not necessarily in the
> same boat.
> 
> Cracks are often things like registration codes or devices to break
> copy-protected software.  My personal opinion is that copy-protected
> software is a bad thing anyway, and that the creation of both
> copy-protected software and non-free software is unethical.  However,
> this doesn't mean that copying or cracking this software is
> necessarily ethical; more on that below.
> 
> Hacking is a broad area.  I have no problem with discussion of ways to
> break in to machines and the like.  The reason is that open discussion
> is fundamental to ensuring security.  As has been said, "Security by
> obsecurity is no security at all."  This is the model Microsoft uses.
> When somebody finds a problem in Windows, they try to make sure that
> nobody else knows about it.  This means that if somebody does discover
> a problem, Microsoft doesn't publicize it, and machines throughout the
> world may be vulnerable to attack.  Contrast this to Unix/Linux where
> "full disclosure" rules the day.  This enables any security problems
> to be fixed quickly -- often within minutes or hours -- and system
> administrators and users alike are aware of the problem and can
> protect themselves.  Publicizing details about ways to get around
> security of software is vital to protecting the public, and it is
> legal.  Often times the best or only way for administrators to test
> their security is to try to hack into their own machines.  This is one 
> reason why Unix/Linux is so much more secure than NT.
> 
> This is one aspect of it, and I see it as positive.  Another is that
> of hacking into a company's database to steal credit card numbers, for 
> instance.  This is not good, and certainly should not be condoned.  I
> also would have bad feelings towards people that hack into others'
> machines even if they don't steal credit card numbers or something
> else important.  However, I don't think that anybody would really
> advocate doing this since it clearly is illegal.
> 
> Security attacks, though, are not really a focus of the ACLUG lists
> and are better handled by other lists like Bugtraq, so I don't see
> much impact of this here.
> 
> Warez (or copying of commercial software) is a current hot topic in
> the free software community.  Most free software advocates such as
> myself view it as unethical to make proprietary software with a
> copyright that does not give out source and prevents the end user from 
> utilizing the software fully or finding out how it works.  We can
> discuss exactly why this is unethical if you want -- suffice it to say 
> that a very convincing argument can be made for it in most mainstream
> ethical doctrines.  Given this, some free software advocates see
> nothing unethical about violating the overly-restrictive license that
> should not have been imposed in the first place.  On the other hand,
> other free-software advocates say that it is unethical to copy
> software not because of the license but because it contributes to the
> popularity of non-free software in the world, and contributing to this 
> popularity is unethical.  I would tend to agree that it would be
> unethical for this reason, however I can understand the other point of 
> view as well.
> 
> > but then one day I was browsing the web and found something I wrote. 
> > Some guy had taken every reference to me off it and made it his own.  He
> > was taking credit for something that I spent precious time creating.  It
> 
> I don't think that anybody would say that the behavior of this third
> person was right or justified.  If you put your software under the
> GPL, what he did is flatly illegal and he could be successfully sued
> for violating your copyright.
> 
> > doesn't feel very good when you discover that someone has stolen your
> > pet project.  Even though it was freeware, I didn't like it.  People
> > just like you and I are trying to help the Linux community along.  I
> > believe that it would be undermining the Linux movement to bite the hand
> > that feeds us, even if it is large companies like Corel or small
> > companies like 4 front technologies.  As a group we can't stop it, but
> > we can prevent the meeting and the mailing list from participating.
> 
> Corel, 4front, etc. are somewhat of an odd position.  Most people,
> including myself, won't lose a lot of sleep over it if they continue
> to make non-free software.  I am very glad that Netscape is now
> releaseing the source code; their product will be much better because
> of it.  However, the fact is that just as Windows has been obsoleted
> by free software, WordPerfect and Word will be obsoleted by free
> software too (and to a large extent, this has already occured).
> 4front's OSS has already been obsoleted by completely free projects in 
> Linux to a certain extent, and will probably be totally obsolete
> within a year.  KDE had already been surpassed by Gnome, and older
> non-free technologies such as Motif are already virtually dead, having 
> been surpassed by the free Gtk.
> 
> Once Corel realizes that the only way to really compete against
> Microsoft is to free their software like Netscape has done, the
> development of WordPerfect, Ventura, etc. will take off.  Netscape's
> browser development has received a tremendous infulx of new features
> due to its newfound freedom, and WordPerfect surely would receive the
> same.
> 
> As a good example, look at the Gimp.  It has been under development
> for less than a year, if I remember correctly (versions prior to 0.5
> were before the complete code rewrite, so they don't count.)  In that
> short time, it has already surpassed in many ways all the commercial
> photo editors that have been around for years -- PhotoShop, Paint
> Shop, Corel Photo Paint, etc.  Sendmail is another good example -- the 
> most powerful mail server on the planet comes only as free software.
> 
> As the person running the mailing lists, I am often in difficult
> situations like this.  My general policy is that nothing is banned
> because of expressing a distaste with current laws and the like.  (eg, 
> I don't think that anybody can argue successfully that it's ethical to 
> restrict exportation of crypto from the US but it is illegal
> nonetheless).  That said, there are certain things that will not be
> tolerated: spam, foul language, personal attacks, and the like.
> However, nobody will be chastised for expressing what may be an
> unpopular opinion.  After all, things that once were unpopular
> opinions (like democracy, for instance) may end up being superior to
> existing commonly-held opinions.
> 
> I'd be interested to hear what you think of all this.
> 
> 
> John
> 
> -- 
> John Goerzen   Linux, Unix consulting & programming   jgoerzen@xxxxxxxxxxxx |
> Developer, Debian GNU/Linux (Free powerful OS upgrade)       www.debian.org |
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
> Visit the Air Capital Linux Users Group on the web at http://www.aclug.org
> ---
> This is the Air Capitol Linux Users Group discussion list.  If you
> want to unsubscribe, send the word "unsubscribe" to
> aclug-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx.  If you want to post to the list, send your
> message to aclug-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx.
> 

---
This is the Air Capitol Linux Users Group discussion list.  If you
want to unsubscribe, send the word "unsubscribe" to
aclug-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx.  If you want to post to the list, send your
message to aclug-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx.