free software, unfree software, ethics and social behaviour

Some of my answers to basic questions

Written in a survey [1] about attitudes towards free software [2].

Is proprietary (=unfree) software immoral or unethical?

it isn't immoral (moral = what's the current stance of mainstream society), but it is unethical when solidarity and self-determination are part of your ethical axioms.

In a society where people are used to being forbidden to give bread to a starving child, giving bread you'd otherwise throw away to that child instead could well be immoral.

So only software which allows you to act ethically is ethical - and that's free software. Even better is free software under strong copyleft licenses like the GPL [3], because that protects our right to act ethically for any future versions of the software.

Do you believe that proprietary software is "illegitimate"?

No.

Legitimate doesn't mean "not contrary to existing law". Even in countries where the police is allowed to torture people, torture is illegitimate. At least that's my understanding. It means that something is wrong and should be forbidden.

I believe that people have the right to make unfree software (people also have the right to do tv-shows like "popstars"). I don't think anyone should use that software, though.

I can't force people to adher to my code of ethics without acting against my ethics myself. But I can try to convince them that my understanding of ethics is right.

Do you believe that proprietary software is "antisocial"?

In many cases yes. But it depends on the case.

Note

If I had to develop unfree software to earn enough to live a more or less comforting life, I'd likely choose to do so. That's why I fight now, so I can earn money ethically later on. Or at least enable my children to do so (more detailed in german [4]).