1998-10-04 - Re: propose: `cypherpunks license’ (Re: Wanted: Twofish source code)

Header Data

From: Richard Stallman <rms@santafe.edu>
To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
Message Hash: 53811c986f27c5a9e3d63bcf78107e56f7df7c70bb66eec9607d46e2c67c723a
Message ID: <199810042124.PAA06245@wijiji.santafe.edu>
Reply To: <199809281845.TAA18662@server.eternity.org>
UTC Datetime: 1998-10-04 08:24:47 UTC
Raw Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1998 16:24:47 +0800

Raw message

From: Richard Stallman <rms@santafe.edu>
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1998 16:24:47 +0800
To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
Subject: Re: propose: `cypherpunks license' (Re: Wanted: Twofish source code)
In-Reply-To: <199809281845.TAA18662@server.eternity.org>
Message-ID: <199810042124.PAA06245@wijiji.santafe.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain

A couple of people responded to this

    It isn't surprising that people who want to write non-free software
    are disappointed that the GNU project won't help them.  What is
    amazing is that they feel this is unfair.

by expressing doubt that anyone really thinks so.
I think the person who wrote this text

    I used to be quite pro-GNU until I tried this exercise (writing
    commercial crypto software for software companies) and ended up
    re-writing huge tracts of stuff just to remove the GNU license virus.

made that feeling quite clear through his use of name-calling.  He did
not content himself with saying, "I had to rewrite huge tracts of
stuff because its authors did not give permission to use it in a
proprietary program," because that straightforward and accurate
description would have shown why his resentment was unjustified.