X-Git-Url: https://code.delx.au/gnu-emacs/blobdiff_plain/21733e4f154f8830fa568a347a0d6dbd59793c2b..ef4ed84e72a323b3d29dc34df92d3f89ad4fc322:/etc/GNU diff --git a/etc/GNU b/etc/GNU index c97aa6f15e..f8078d41cd 100644 --- a/etc/GNU +++ b/etc/GNU @@ -1,544 +1,8 @@ -Copyright (C) 1985, 1993, 2001-2013 Free Software Foundation, Inc. - - Permission is granted to anyone to make or distribute verbatim copies -of this document, in any medium, provided that the copyright notice and -permission notice are preserved, and that the distributor grants the -recipient permission for further redistribution as permitted by this -notice. - - Modified versions may not be made. - The GNU Manifesto -***************** - - The GNU Manifesto which appears below was written by Richard - Stallman at the beginning of the GNU project, to ask for - participation and support. For the first few years, it was - updated in minor ways to account for developments, but now it - seems best to leave it unchanged as most people have seen it. - - Since that time, we have learned about certain common - misunderstandings that different wording could help avoid. - Footnotes added in 1993 help clarify these points. - - For up-to-date information about the available GNU software, - please see www.gnu.org. For software tasks to work on, see - http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/tasklist. For other ways - to contribute, see http://www.gnu.org/help. - -What's GNU? Gnu's Not Unix! -============================ - - GNU, which stands for Gnu's Not Unix, is the name for the complete -Unix-compatible software system which I am writing so that I can give it -away free to everyone who can use it.(1) Several other volunteers are -helping me. Contributions of time, money, programs and equipment are -greatly needed. - - So far we have an Emacs text editor with Lisp for writing editor -commands, a source level debugger, a yacc-compatible parser generator, -a linker, and around 35 utilities. A shell (command interpreter) is -nearly completed. A new portable optimizing C compiler has compiled -itself and may be released this year. An initial kernel exists but -many more features are needed to emulate Unix. When the kernel and -compiler are finished, it will be possible to distribute a GNU system -suitable for program development. We will use TeX as our text -formatter, but an nroff is being worked on. We will use the free, -portable X window system as well. After this we will add a portable -Common Lisp, an Empire game, a spreadsheet, and hundreds of other -things, plus on-line documentation. We hope to supply, eventually, -everything useful that normally comes with a Unix system, and more. - - GNU will be able to run Unix programs, but will not be identical to -Unix. We will make all improvements that are convenient, based on our -experience with other operating systems. In particular, we plan to -have longer file names, file version numbers, a crashproof file system, -file name completion perhaps, terminal-independent display support, and -perhaps eventually a Lisp-based window system through which several -Lisp programs and ordinary Unix programs can share a screen. Both C -and Lisp will be available as system programming languages. We will -try to support UUCP, MIT Chaosnet, and Internet protocols for -communication. - - GNU is aimed initially at machines in the 68000/16000 class with -virtual memory, because they are the easiest machines to make it run -on. The extra effort to make it run on smaller machines will be left -to someone who wants to use it on them. - - To avoid horrible confusion, please pronounce the `G' in the word -`GNU' when it is the name of this project. - -Why I Must Write GNU -==================== - - I consider that the golden rule requires that if I like a program I -must share it with other people who like it. Software sellers want to -divide the users and conquer them, making each user agree not to share -with others. I refuse to break solidarity with other users in this -way. I cannot in good conscience sign a nondisclosure agreement or a -software license agreement. For years I worked within the Artificial -Intelligence Lab to resist such tendencies and other inhospitalities, -but eventually they had gone too far: I could not remain in an -institution where such things are done for me against my will. - - So that I can continue to use computers without dishonor, I have -decided to put together a sufficient body of free software so that I -will be able to get along without any software that is not free. I -have resigned from the AI lab to deny MIT any legal excuse to prevent -me from giving GNU away. - -Why GNU Will Be Compatible with Unix -==================================== - - Unix is not my ideal system, but it is not too bad. The essential -features of Unix seem to be good ones, and I think I can fill in what -Unix lacks without spoiling them. And a system compatible with Unix -would be convenient for many other people to adopt. - -How GNU Will Be Available -========================= - - GNU is not in the public domain. Everyone will be permitted to -modify and redistribute GNU, but no distributor will be allowed to -restrict its further redistribution. That is to say, proprietary -modifications will not be allowed. I want to make sure that all -versions of GNU remain free. - -Why Many Other Programmers Want to Help -======================================= - - I have found many other programmers who are excited about GNU and -want to help. - - Many programmers are unhappy about the commercialization of system -software. It may enable them to make more money, but it requires them -to feel in conflict with other programmers in general rather than feel -as comrades. The fundamental act of friendship among programmers is the -sharing of programs; marketing arrangements now typically used -essentially forbid programmers to treat others as friends. The -purchaser of software must choose between friendship and obeying the -law. Naturally, many decide that friendship is more important. But -those who believe in law often do not feel at ease with either choice. -They become cynical and think that programming is just a way of making -money. - - By working on and using GNU rather than proprietary programs, we can -be hospitable to everyone and obey the law. In addition, GNU serves as -an example to inspire and a banner to rally others to join us in -sharing. This can give us a feeling of harmony which is impossible if -we use software that is not free. For about half the programmers I -talk to, this is an important happiness that money cannot replace. - -How You Can Contribute -====================== - - I am asking computer manufacturers for donations of machines and -money. I'm asking individuals for donations of programs and work. - - One consequence you can expect if you donate machines is that GNU -will run on them at an early date. The machines should be complete, -ready to use systems, approved for use in a residential area, and not -in need of sophisticated cooling or power. - - I have found very many programmers eager to contribute part-time -work for GNU. For most projects, such part-time distributed work would -be very hard to coordinate; the independently-written parts would not -work together. But for the particular task of replacing Unix, this -problem is absent. A complete Unix system contains hundreds of utility -programs, each of which is documented separately. Most interface -specifications are fixed by Unix compatibility. If each contributor -can write a compatible replacement for a single Unix utility, and make -it work properly in place of the original on a Unix system, then these -utilities will work right when put together. Even allowing for Murphy -to create a few unexpected problems, assembling these components will -be a feasible task. (The kernel will require closer communication and -will be worked on by a small, tight group.) - - If I get donations of money, I may be able to hire a few people full -or part time. The salary won't be high by programmers' standards, but -I'm looking for people for whom building community spirit is as -important as making money. I view this as a way of enabling dedicated -people to devote their full energies to working on GNU by sparing them -the need to make a living in another way. - -Why All Computer Users Will Benefit -=================================== - - Once GNU is written, everyone will be able to obtain good system -software free, just like air.(2) - - This means much more than just saving everyone the price of a Unix -license. It means that much wasteful duplication of system programming -effort will be avoided. This effort can go instead into advancing the -state of the art. - - Complete system sources will be available to everyone. As a result, -a user who needs changes in the system will always be free to make them -himself, or hire any available programmer or company to make them for -him. Users will no longer be at the mercy of one programmer or company -which owns the sources and is in sole position to make changes. - - Schools will be able to provide a much more educational environment -by encouraging all students to study and improve the system code. -Harvard's computer lab used to have the policy that no program could be -installed on the system if its sources were not on public display, and -upheld it by actually refusing to install certain programs. I was very -much inspired by this. - - Finally, the overhead of considering who owns the system software -and what one is or is not entitled to do with it will be lifted. - - Arrangements to make people pay for using a program, including -licensing of copies, always incur a tremendous cost to society through -the cumbersome mechanisms necessary to figure out how much (that is, -which programs) a person must pay for. And only a police state can -force everyone to obey them. Consider a space station where air must -be manufactured at great cost: charging each breather per liter of air -may be fair, but wearing the metered gas mask all day and all night is -intolerable even if everyone can afford to pay the air bill. And the -TV cameras everywhere to see if you ever take the mask off are -outrageous. It's better to support the air plant with a head tax and -chuck the masks. - - Copying all or parts of a program is as natural to a programmer as -breathing, and as productive. It ought to be as free. - -Some Easily Rebutted Objections to GNU's Goals -============================================== - - "Nobody will use it if it is free, because that means they can't - rely on any support." - - "You have to charge for the program to pay for providing the - support." - - If people would rather pay for GNU plus service than get GNU free -without service, a company to provide just service to people who have -obtained GNU free ought to be profitable.(3) - - We must distinguish between support in the form of real programming -work and mere handholding. The former is something one cannot rely on -from a software vendor. If your problem is not shared by enough -people, the vendor will tell you to get lost. - - If your business needs to be able to rely on support, the only way -is to have all the necessary sources and tools. Then you can hire any -available person to fix your problem; you are not at the mercy of any -individual. With Unix, the price of sources puts this out of -consideration for most businesses. With GNU this will be easy. It is -still possible for there to be no available competent person, but this -problem cannot be blamed on distribution arrangements. GNU does not -eliminate all the world's problems, only some of them. - - Meanwhile, the users who know nothing about computers need -handholding: doing things for them which they could easily do -themselves but don't know how. - - Such services could be provided by companies that sell just -hand-holding and repair service. If it is true that users would rather -spend money and get a product with service, they will also be willing -to buy the service having got the product free. The service companies -will compete in quality and price; users will not be tied to any -particular one. Meanwhile, those of us who don't need the service -should be able to use the program without paying for the service. - - "You cannot reach many people without advertising, and you must - charge for the program to support that." - - "It's no use advertising a program people can get free." - - There are various forms of free or very cheap publicity that can be -used to inform numbers of computer users about something like GNU. But -it may be true that one can reach more microcomputer users with -advertising. If this is really so, a business which advertises the -service of copying and mailing GNU for a fee ought to be successful -enough to pay for its advertising and more. This way, only the users -who benefit from the advertising pay for it. - - On the other hand, if many people get GNU from their friends, and -such companies don't succeed, this will show that advertising was not -really necessary to spread GNU. Why is it that free market advocates -don't want to let the free market decide this?(4) - - "My company needs a proprietary operating system to get a - competitive edge." - - GNU will remove operating system software from the realm of -competition. You will not be able to get an edge in this area, but -neither will your competitors be able to get an edge over you. You and -they will compete in other areas, while benefiting mutually in this -one. If your business is selling an operating system, you will not -like GNU, but that's tough on you. If your business is something else, -GNU can save you from being pushed into the expensive business of -selling operating systems. - - I would like to see GNU development supported by gifts from many -manufacturers and users, reducing the cost to each.(5) - - "Don't programmers deserve a reward for their creativity?" - - If anything deserves a reward, it is social contribution. -Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society -is free to use the results. If programmers deserve to be rewarded for -creating innovative programs, by the same token they deserve to be -punished if they restrict the use of these programs. - - "Shouldn't a programmer be able to ask for a reward for his - creativity?" - - There is nothing wrong with wanting pay for work, or seeking to -maximize one's income, as long as one does not use means that are -destructive. But the means customary in the field of software today -are based on destruction. - - Extracting money from users of a program by restricting their use of -it is destructive because the restrictions reduce the amount and the -ways that the program can be used. This reduces the amount of wealth -that humanity derives from the program. When there is a deliberate -choice to restrict, the harmful consequences are deliberate destruction. - - The reason a good citizen does not use such destructive means to -become wealthier is that, if everyone did so, we would all become -poorer from the mutual destructiveness. This is Kantian ethics; or, -the Golden Rule. Since I do not like the consequences that result if -everyone hoards information, I am required to consider it wrong for one -to do so. Specifically, the desire to be rewarded for one's creativity -does not justify depriving the world in general of all or part of that -creativity. - - "Won't programmers starve?" - - I could answer that nobody is forced to be a programmer. Most of us -cannot manage to get any money for standing on the street and making -faces. But we are not, as a result, condemned to spend our lives -standing on the street making faces, and starving. We do something -else. - - But that is the wrong answer because it accepts the questioner's -implicit assumption: that without ownership of software, programmers -cannot possibly be paid a cent. Supposedly it is all or nothing. - - The real reason programmers will not starve is that it will still be -possible for them to get paid for programming; just not paid as much as -now. - - Restricting copying is not the only basis for business in software. -It is the most common basis because it brings in the most money. If it -were prohibited, or rejected by the customer, software business would -move to other bases of organization which are now used less often. -There are always numerous ways to organize any kind of business. - - Probably programming will not be as lucrative on the new basis as it -is now. But that is not an argument against the change. It is not -considered an injustice that sales clerks make the salaries that they -now do. If programmers made the same, that would not be an injustice -either. (In practice they would still make considerably more than -that.) - - "Don't people have a right to control how their creativity is - used?" - - "Control over the use of one's ideas" really constitutes control over -other people's lives; and it is usually used to make their lives more -difficult. - - People who have studied the issue of intellectual property rights(6) -carefully (such as lawyers) say that there is no intrinsic right to -intellectual property. The kinds of supposed intellectual property -rights that the government recognizes were created by specific acts of -legislation for specific purposes. - - For example, the patent system was established to encourage -inventors to disclose the details of their inventions. Its purpose was -to help society rather than to help inventors. At the time, the life -span of 17 years for a patent was short compared with the rate of -advance of the state of the art. Since patents are an issue only among -manufacturers, for whom the cost and effort of a license agreement are -small compared with setting up production, the patents often do not do -much harm. They do not obstruct most individuals who use patented -products. - - The idea of copyright did not exist in ancient times, when authors -frequently copied other authors at length in works of non-fiction. This -practice was useful, and is the only way many authors' works have -survived even in part. The copyright system was created expressly for -the purpose of encouraging authorship. In the domain for which it was -invented--books, which could be copied economically only on a printing -press--it did little harm, and did not obstruct most of the individuals -who read the books. - - All intellectual property rights are just licenses granted by society -because it was thought, rightly or wrongly, that society as a whole -would benefit by granting them. But in any particular situation, we -have to ask: are we really better off granting such license? What kind -of act are we licensing a person to do? - - The case of programs today is very different from that of books a -hundred years ago. The fact that the easiest way to copy a program is -from one neighbor to another, the fact that a program has both source -code and object code which are distinct, and the fact that a program is -used rather than read and enjoyed, combine to create a situation in -which a person who enforces a copyright is harming society as a whole -both materially and spiritually; in which a person should not do so -regardless of whether the law enables him to. - - "Competition makes things get done better." - - The paradigm of competition is a race: by rewarding the winner, we -encourage everyone to run faster. When capitalism really works this -way, it does a good job; but its defenders are wrong in assuming it -always works this way. If the runners forget why the reward is offered -and become intent on winning, no matter how, they may find other -strategies--such as, attacking other runners. If the runners get into -a fist fight, they will all finish late. - - Proprietary and secret software is the moral equivalent of runners -in a fist fight. Sad to say, the only referee we've got does not seem -to object to fights; he just regulates them ("For every ten yards you -run, you can fire one shot"). He really ought to break them up, and -penalize runners for even trying to fight. - - "Won't everyone stop programming without a monetary incentive?" - - Actually, many people will program with absolutely no monetary -incentive. Programming has an irresistible fascination for some -people, usually the people who are best at it. There is no shortage of -professional musicians who keep at it even though they have no hope of -making a living that way. - - But really this question, though commonly asked, is not appropriate -to the situation. Pay for programmers will not disappear, only become -less. So the right question is, will anyone program with a reduced -monetary incentive? My experience shows that they will. - - For more than ten years, many of the world's best programmers worked -at the Artificial Intelligence Lab for far less money than they could -have had anywhere else. They got many kinds of non-monetary rewards: -fame and appreciation, for example. And creativity is also fun, a -reward in itself. - - Then most of them left when offered a chance to do the same -interesting work for a lot of money. - - What the facts show is that people will program for reasons other -than riches; but if given a chance to make a lot of money as well, they -will come to expect and demand it. Low-paying organizations do poorly -in competition with high-paying ones, but they do not have to do badly -if the high-paying ones are banned. - - "We need the programmers desperately. If they demand that we stop - helping our neighbors, we have to obey." - - You're never so desperate that you have to obey this sort of demand. -Remember: millions for defense, but not a cent for tribute! - - "Programmers need to make a living somehow." - - In the short run, this is true. However, there are plenty of ways -that programmers could make a living without selling the right to use a -program. This way is customary now because it brings programmers and -businessmen the most money, not because it is the only way to make a -living. It is easy to find other ways if you want to find them. Here -are a number of examples. - - A manufacturer introducing a new computer will pay for the porting of -operating systems onto the new hardware. - - The sale of teaching, hand-holding and maintenance services could -also employ programmers. - - People with new ideas could distribute programs as freeware(7), asking -for donations from satisfied users, or selling hand-holding services. -I have met people who are already working this way successfully. - - Users with related needs can form users' groups, and pay dues. A -group would contract with programming companies to write programs that -the group's members would like to use. - - All sorts of development can be funded with a Software Tax: - - Suppose everyone who buys a computer has to pay x percent of the - price as a software tax. The government gives this to an agency - like the NSF to spend on software development. - - But if the computer buyer makes a donation to software development - himself, he can take a credit against the tax. He can donate to - the project of his own choosing--often, chosen because he hopes to - use the results when it is done. He can take a credit for any - amount of donation up to the total tax he had to pay. - - The total tax rate could be decided by a vote of the payers of the - tax, weighted according to the amount they will be taxed on. - - The consequences: - - * The computer-using community supports software development. - - * This community decides what level of support is needed. - - * Users who care which projects their share is spent on can - choose this for themselves. - - In the long run, making programs free is a step toward the -post-scarcity world, where nobody will have to work very hard just to -make a living. People will be free to devote themselves to activities -that are fun, such as programming, after spending the necessary ten -hours a week on required tasks such as legislation, family counseling, -robot repair and asteroid prospecting. There will be no need to be -able to make a living from programming. - - We have already greatly reduced the amount of work that the whole -society must do for its actual productivity, but only a little of this -has translated itself into leisure for workers because much -nonproductive activity is required to accompany productive activity. -The main causes of this are bureaucracy and isometric struggles against -competition. Free software will greatly reduce these drains in the -area of software production. We must do this, in order for technical -gains in productivity to translate into less work for us. - - ---------- Footnotes ---------- - - (1) The wording here was careless. The intention was that nobody -would have to pay for *permission* to use the GNU system. But the -words don't make this clear, and people often interpret them as saying -that copies of GNU should always be distributed at little or no charge. -That was never the intent; later on, the manifesto mentions the -possibility of companies providing the service of distribution for a -profit. Subsequently I have learned to distinguish carefully between -"free" in the sense of freedom and "free" in the sense of price. Free -software is software that users have the freedom to distribute and -change. Some users may obtain copies at no charge, while others pay to -obtain copies--and if the funds help support improving the software, so -much the better. The important thing is that everyone who has a copy -has the freedom to cooperate with others in using it. - - (2) This is another place I failed to distinguish carefully between -the two different meanings of "free". The statement as it stands is -not false--you can get copies of GNU software at no charge, from your -friends or over the net. But it does suggest the wrong idea. - - (3) Several such companies now exist. - - (4) The Free Software Foundation raised most of its funds for 10 -years from a distribution service, although it is a charity rather -than a company. - - (5) A group of computer companies pooled funds around 1991 to -support maintenance of the GNU C Compiler. - (6) In the 80s I had not yet realized how confusing it was to speak -of "the issue" of "intellectual property". That term is obviously -biased; more subtle is the fact that it lumps together various -disparate laws which raise very different issues. Nowadays I urge -people to reject the term "intellectual property" entirely, lest it -lead others to suppose that those laws form one coherent issue. The way to be -clear is to discuss patents, copyrights, and trademarks separately. -See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/not-ipr.xhtml for more explanation -of how this term spreads confusion and bias. +Note added March 2014: - (7) Subsequently we have learned to distinguish between "free -software" and "freeware". The term "freeware" means software you are -free to redistribute, but usually you are not free to study and change -the source code, so most of it is not free software. See -http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html for more -explanation. +This file is obsolete and will be removed in future. +Please update any references to use + info node `(emacs)Manifesto' +instead.