O'pain Software Foundation: (3) relationship to GNU & openness

[Jim Adcock]

| I see too much resemblance between "Open Software Foundation"
| and "Free Software Foundation".  

Well, as long as we're complaining about naming conventions,
how about complaining about "Free Software Foundation" ???


Free means Free.


Free does not mean you have an obligation to send someone bucks.

Free does not mean that you are forced to buy into someone else's
political/economic philosophies before one is allowed to use
his/her software.

Free does not mean you're going to threaten to sue the ass off
anyone who says or does something you don't like.

Free does not mean you take someone else's software that was
given to you without restriction, and add your own licensing
restrictions.


Free means free.


Free means being able to speak your honest mind without having
to consult with a lawyer first.

Free means being able to speak your honest mind without having
the one you're talking about sending his/her lawyer to come talk
to you.

Free means being able to charge a buck for one's efforts, if one
feels the marketplace is willing to pay you a buck for those
efforts.

Free means being able to put one ideas in the public domain,
if that is what one chooses to do, for the betterment of all
man-kind,  without restriction, to do with as they might.


Free means free.


I for one, am sick and tired of having to run to a lawyer
everytime I want to write some software, or to speak my mind,
or having someone else sick his/her lawyers on me when I do
speak my mind.


I don't see where "Free Software Foundation's" software is any 
more "free" than the "Open Software Foundation's" software is "open"


"A rose by any other name ..... "

Mine own opinion only.