![[ home ]](/images/ivory.png)
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/categories.html#commercialSoftware
Commercial Software
Commercial software is software being developed by a business which aims to make money from the use of the software. ``Commercial and ``proprietary are not the same thing! Most commercial software is proprietary, but there is commercial free software, and there is non-commercial non-free software.
For example, GNU Ada is always distributed under the terms of the GNU GPL, and every copy is free software; but its developers sell support contracts. When their salesmen speak to prospective customers, sometimes the customers say, ``We would feel safer with a commercial compiler. The salesmen reply, ``GNU Ada is a commercial compiler; it happens to be free software.
For the GNU Project, the emphasis is in the other order: the important thing is that GNU Ada is free software; whether it is commercial is not a crucial question. However, the additional development of GNU Ada that results from its being commercial it is definitely beneficial.
Please help spread the awareness that commercial free software is possible. You can do this by making an effort not to say ``commercial when you mean ``proprietary.
RMS: A non-free program is a predatory social system that keeps people in a state of domination and division, and uses the spoils to dominate more. It may seem like a profitable option to become one of the emperor's lieutenants, but ultimately the ethical thing to do is to resist the system and put an end to it.
http://www.ofb.biz/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=260
Anonymous: It's so easy to dismiss the RMS philosophy, but a lot of what he says is very important. When software is free it empowers the consumer. Speaking in business terms, when source code is open and a compnay is trying to sell it, the emphasis has to be on superior customer service, rather than on pushing a product. Seeing as we're all consumers, and very few of us are entrepreneurs, who do you think should hold the most power? Propietary software, in principal (as RMS likes to say), disregards the rights of the consumer in the worst way. In a proprietary environment the company risks becoming too focused on how to further lock people into a platform (which may or may not be inferior). Witness Microsoft. This is something that will eventually become their downfall unless they change the way they treat their customers. If a company like Red Hat started acting like Microsoft they would be out of business in a month. Free software allows consumers to control their own destiny when business relationships go sour. I don't think folks should take RMS so literally. As with anything there should be room for interpretation and critical thought.
http://www.ofb.biz/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=260
