Free Software Philosophy
The cluster debates the principles of free (as in freedom) software versus proprietary software, including whether FOSS projects should restrict use in proprietary products to protect user freedoms and the trade-offs involved.
Activity Over Time
Top Contributors
Keywords
Sample Comments
No, users should be free not to use the proprietary software.
People who don't like proprietary software?
Because some people don't use un-free software.
Last I checked it's free software. The point of free software is to do what the user wants, because the user is free to fork or patch misfeatures like those.If it were proprietary, then yeah, it would have no point.
No doubt because the author doesn't want it to be used in proprietary software that doesn't respect the user's freedoms. At least, not without taking a cut.
Your argument is 'moot'.Free software is no more 'forcing' anyone to respect your ideological beliefs than proprietary software is, in neither case you can 'prevent anyone from throwing it out on principle'.Proprietary limits the rights of end users, you are free to not use proprietary software.Free software secures rights of end users, you are free to not use Free software.
Everybody enjoys free (as in "freedom") software. Turns out, even quality-wise free software is often much better than non-free, closed-source software. On the other hand, it may be hard to really understand the rationale behind it. The idea goes against the principles of capitalism (based on property rights). Also, if it is completely OK for hardware design to be proprietary, why should it not be OK for software? What is so special about it? The arguments put forward by proponents of
Because software freedom is important?
Some people believe in software freedom more than you do.
Wanting to avoid running propietary software is a valid reason. It's opinion based, but valid.