Re: [dwm] Freedom (was: Re: sic ipv6 patch)

From: Matthias Kirschner <>
Date: Tue, 20 May 2008 16:32:01 +0200

* Kurt H Maier <> [2008-05-20 09:08:12 -0500]:

> On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 8:43 AM, Matthias Kirschner <> wrote:
> > Why do you think a user who gets DWM in a binary on some device knows a)
> > that this is DWM and b) knows that DWM is licensed under MIT? So this
> > user does not have the freedom to use, study, share and improve the
> > software.
> You think their ability to hack on dwm is destroyed by the fact that
> they can't identify it as dwm?
> I don't see how this follows. Googling "tiling window manager" turns
> up a ton of results, most of which are descended from dwm.

How should someone know what a tiling window manager is, when he does
not know what a window manger is?

Or perhaps better go away from the DWM case: How should a user know that
there is "original Free Software" (like a BSD Kernel) in his router,
mobile phone, car, digital camera, television, ...???? Or the nice photo
application on the new TV?? Nobody tells them... they do not know the
name, they might not even know that there is something like Free
Software, and they might not know that there is something like Source
Code. How should they find out that the original software provided them
the four freedoms???

Best wishes,
Received on Tue May 20 2008 - 16:32:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Sun Jul 13 2008 - 15:42:18 UTC