Charge for the service, not the product

That's my attitude.

will hack DOOMcode for food

I mean, the business model that software companies use makes no fucking sense.

You're charging people to buy a product that's infinitely reproducable.

That makes no damned sense.

Red Hat does it right

i still enjoy a nice piece of affordable full price retail software

The cheap software rack at Target

free programs can be amazing(OBS) or shit(LibreOffice)

Subscription based software can sugma

^

Isn't Libre not technically Free?

our targets dont have software racks

I thought it was just Open Source.

they have xboxlive and minecraft paycards

Bitch, move out of the Hood

Libre is a free program

Yeah, but you still have to abide by a license regarding usage and redistribution don't you?

doesnt make it not free for the enduser

Like you can't just have your entire office just use Libre.

GPL doesnt affect the enduser

I do think commercial use is "prohibited" by the license

I know it doesn't.

they dont have to agree to any terms under it

so for office use it would be known as "output only"

I'm just saying that technically it isn't "Free Software".

there ain't no such thing as free software

thats a product of Stallman's imagination

Free as in What I Consider Free

it's 1) free source code, not just free software

it's 2) free as in freedom, meaning you owe them source code back

Yeah, I don't consider that 2nd clause very Free.

the FSF and Stallman dont like REAL free software such as MIT license because it doesnt require changes to be made available to the original author

so it doesnt amass more free code for the GPLborg overall

so they say as an author, the GPL3 protects you more, and that may be so, but it does so by being more restrictive

aka less free as opposed to as stallman claims more free

I don't agree with Stallman's vision %100. He's frankly a fucking communist.

really free software is only free for Richard Stallman

<:think_woke:378717098681171988>

The fuck.