Re: Permission to use portions of the recent GNU Emacs Manual
Stefan Monnier <monnier(a)iro.umontreal.ca> writes:
But I think that this "freedom" argument is flawed.
"Freedom" means
something different to everyone, so it's not a very good way to convince
other people. Especially in the context of the Free Software movement,
I understand "free" to apply to the program itself, not its user:
the program (or the doc) itself is "free", can't be harnessed/hijacked by
anyone. It quite directly implies that people aren't "free" to use it as
they please.
That sounds more like the program is being protected than freed.