Liberated Calypso docs found

[Michael Sokolov]

Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli <GNUtoo at no-log.org> wrote:

> Not a good idea, see http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/pirate-party.html

There are some major differences between what I'm doing (and have been
doing all my life) and the stereotypical "pirate":

* The stereotypical "pirate" is content with the mediocre quality and
  the closed/proprietary/disempowering nature of their ware (typically
  weenie dose OS distributions and applications for that OS) even when
  superior free alternatives do exist and are readily available.

* The stereotypical "pirate" is content with unmodifiable binary-only
  ware.  He would have no idea what to do with a source code package if
  one landed in his lap.

* The stereotypical "pirate" does not seek to improve the ware and is
  generally not involved in major creative work of his own.

In contrast, my work with forcibly-liberated proprietary sw/fw happens
only if and when I have some source code to start with.  (That source
may contain blobs: I don't like them obviously, but the critically
important point is that I never act as the bad guy who withholds the
source, if I don't have that source myself, it isn't my fault.)  And I
don't just keep the ware for its own sake, I start Free Software / OSHW
projects with very significant contributions of my own which just happen
to include liberated ex-proprietary code, usually in full source form.

These differences between what I do and the conventional stereotype of
SW "piracy" should address the criticism made by RMS.  If the Swedish
Pirate Party were to succeed in their campaign as-is, it would simply
make what I do fully legal, in Sweden.  Whoo-hoo!  It would NOT hurt
Free Software, because then my full-source, everyone invited to
participate projects which happen to contain liberated ex-proprietary
code would *BE* Free Software in the perfectly legal sense.

MS