[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[DotGNU]Revision 4 Philosophy file

From: Peter Minten
Subject: [DotGNU]Revision 4 Philosophy file
Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 19:04:01 +0200

Hi folks,

here is a new revision of the Philosophy file. The change is that the
file now says that not all DotGNU developers agree with the prinicples
of GNU and/or FreeDevelopers.
Hi folks,

here is a new revision of the Philosophy file. The change is that the file now 
says that not all DotGNU developers agree with the prinicples of GNU and/or 

Here is the file:

DotGNU philosophy file

Copyright (C) 2002 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
Copyright (C) 2002 FreeDevelopers.Net.


Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies
of this document, but changing it is not allowed.


This software is Free Software, not Open Source software. The Free Software 
movement is 
idealistic and tries to tackle questions related to freedom, ethics, principle 
improving society. The Open Source movement avoids these questions.

Please note that if this document refers to free it refers to freedom to use, 
modify and distribute, not to freedom of price.

This program is part of the DotGNU project. The goal of the DotGNU project is 
to create 
'an operating system for the Internet'. DotGNU provides a platform on which web 
applications, so called 'webservices', can run. Microsoft is also working on 
such a 
system called .NET, we believe that the concepts and intentions behind .NET are 
for the user. To prevent Microsoft from gaining yet another monopoly on the 
platform, DotGNU was called into existence.

One of the bad ideas in .NET is the possibility of what is called vendor 
Vendor lock-in is what happens when a user has been using a resource and wants 
to move to a 
different, competing resource, but the resource provider makes that difficult 
or impossible, 
through 'closed formats,' such as word processor document formats. Without the 
old webservice 
the user cannot access the data in it's files and is therefore forced to use 
that webservice.

DotGNU solves this problem by giving users ownership of their data. When an 
owner of data 
on a webservice want's to move to another webservice, then the webservice 
provider must give 
the user the executable code and in some cases (look in the DotGNU faq for more 
info on this) 
the source code of the webservice.

Another problem we have with .NET is the single-authentication service called 
Microsoft Passport. 
This system lets users store their data on a central server controlled by 
This creates great security threats because a cracker can then crack that 
server and get the 
personal information of millions of people. Also the government of the country 
in which the 
server is located could pass legislation allowing it access to that data. 
This would allow that country to spy on people. And of course the 
service will be a major monopoly, which is bad for the users.

DotGNU provides several competing but interoperable single-authentication 
systems. Our systems 
can run on either a remote server under the same conditions as webservices or 
it can run on the 
user's own computer. This will make it harder for unauthorized individuals or 
groups to get at 
confidential personal information.

Please note that DotGNU is not in any way anti-commercial. We are 
anti-oppression, we can't
stand the legal tricks that some commercial firms use to tie the consumer to 
them and to
keep him/her from using the software optimally. An example of that is product 
If a consumer has bought a box with a certain software product in it, he/she is 
free to install
it on a computer and to upgrade that computer. It isn't correct that the 
consumer has to prove,
after upgrading a certain number of components, that he/she has bought the 
software legally.
Instead common court logic (a suspect is innocent until the opposite has been 
proven) dictates
that the software company must prove that the user has bought the product 
illegally and may not
expect help from the consumer (nobody needs to help in a case against 
himself/herself). Thus
product activation is completely illegal (from an ethical sense of view). We 
fight for the 
rights of users, but we don't fight against commercial businesses. For we see 
it as everybody's
right to benefit financially from the production or distribution of software, 
as long as it's
fair to both the producer and the consumer.

Though DotGNU is supported by two organizations (GNU and FreeDevelopers) not 
all DotGNU 
developers agree with the principles of these organizations. If you would like 
to find
out more about these organizations, please visit their websites.

 DotGNU homepage:

 GNU homepage:

 FreeDevelopers homepage:


 The differences between Free Software and Open Source: 

 Why we use the term GNU/Linux

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]