Re: lynx-dev On invitations and pressure

[Philip Webb]

990124 Richard Stallman wrote via Jim Spath: 
> It is always a touchy subject to extend the invitation
> for an independent project, such as Lynx, to join the GNU project.
> No matter how clearly I say that this is just opening up a possibility,
> some people may respond to the invitation as if it were a demand.

i don't believe anyone at lynx-dev has perceived a demand from outside:
what we perceive is a set of conditions we are very hesitant to accept.
 
> I was surprised by the vehemence of one message that was forwarded to me,
> in which a person attempts to threaten the Lynx developers
> with "having his code removed".  No one is entitled to bully you,
> and when someone tries, I hope you will refuse to let that influence you.

Bela Lubkin -- to whom you refer -- is one of our most valuable contributors,
whose comments cannot fairly be characterised as any type of bullying.
for your part, you should not barge into someone else's club
& advise them how to react to one another's behaviour.
 
> Fortunately, he cannot legally remove the code he wrote,
> having previously consented to your use of it.  So set your minds at ease.

our minds are certainly at rest with respect to our colleague:
it is your own project we have serious concerns about.
as for legalities, my question about FSF GNU ETC has always been:
"do they try to enforce these copyrights & if so how,
esp in the international arena of the Internet?"
 
> The same message inaccurately states that the GNU Project is opposed
> to "commercial software entities".  We do aim to replace proprietary
> software with free software, but commercial and proprietary are not
> the same thing.  (See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/categories.html
> for the definitions.)  At a time when companies are increasingly becoming
> involved in developing free software, it is good to encourage them;
> so we should take pains to avoid giving people the idea
> that commercial software cannot be free software.

one problem some of us have is that the terminology seems itself in doubt:
is it `freeware', `open source', `non-proprietary', `non-commercial'?
why should any of us bother about such in-grown debates, anyway?
 
> Lynx is, and has been, an independent project.  If the Lynx developers
> prefer to continue that way, you have every right to do so.
> The invitation to join the alliance which is GNU is just an invitation;
> if you say no, there will be no hard feelings from the GNU Project.
 
that much we do not need telling, as you should realise.
you are perhaps well likened to one of the reformers in the 1500s,
striving to establish a new purer alternative to the established church;
there are others so engaged, whose exact doctrines may not match your own.
members of lynx-dev are in the rather different position of people
eg running a charity hospital, who may generally sympathise with reform,
but for whom the doctrinal requirements of any particular church
are likely to be a hindrance rather than a help to their real-life work.

-- 
========================,,============================================
SUPPORT     ___________//___,  Philip Webb : address@hidden
ELECTRIC   /] [] [] [] [] []|  Centre for Urban & Community Studies
TRANSIT    `-O----------O---'  University of Toronto