So, around 2:00 AM I was buzzed by a friend of mine, David Ingram. He said to me that some of my post were seen by him copy-pasted in other website and he asked me how I felt about it. My answer was a delightful feeling and thank for those who acknowledge my work and use it for their own. Then, this conversation went on to my feelings of the free source community since all my postings in my blog are all free sources (Yes, true free. You don’t have to spend your money for anything. Grab and go).
This reminds me of one of my friend’s post, El Zafir’s Gua Benci Linux (Sorry, it’s in Bahasa Indonesia). He was despised by the fact that linux zealots intimidates other closed source OS user and claim that linux is the superior OS system in compare to other OS. So, David’s question was whether I agree with the free source concept or not (Damn you, David for waking me up for this nonsense).
My answer was a big “NO”. Let me elaborate for you, here. The reason of my objection of the free source concept is the ability for every person to distribute and make derivation of someone’s work without any restriction from its original author. This is a big loophole since this concept really disregard the author or developer of the software’s interest. As a software developer I can’t restrict you from selling or distribute my work that you already acquired to someone else. What if I don’t want this software to be distributed to hackers that I’m worried that they will exploit it and make harmful uses out of it? Also, let’s not say that by doing so, you already reduce your income profit by creating new business rivals that has the same power as you but they don’t have to do a single thing other than copy-pasting your work.
Second loophole is the inability of the author to assess his derivation of work from someone else. Like it or not, the software that is modified from our original work will also determine the eligibility of the original author’s software. In this case, a person can modify the software as they please disregard the quality of the software itself and masquerade their name as the author of the modified version’ s software (in other words, they can say that the modified version is done by me). This, of course, will hurt my credibility as a software developer and I will face many problems in distributing or selling my work to the enterprise.
This answer brought David cynically commented me as a hypocrite since I value free speech as one of my base principle in my democratic politic view. Well, I’m not, David. Free speech is far different from free source. You can’t copy-paste someone’s opinion or theory and claim it that it’s yours. You are bound to copyright-infringement if you use all the author’s idea to make a stand point in either science forum or merely a simple digital media such as the internet. Also, being a democrat doesn’t mean that you also value liberalism. Democracy is a politic perspective that upholds citizen as the supreme power of rules. All regulations have to be inclined to all people’s interest and can’t be interrupted by anyone else. This doesn’t give the idea that you can do as you please because your a citizen living in a democratic country. There are rules that restrict you from interrupting others’ interest.
This conversation then derailed of having me to chat about my politic views to David. Anyway, I’m not saying that free source concept is a bad idea. Heck, I got a lot of knowledge in learning from free source program. What I’m concern about is the software author’s interest in this free source concept. I mean, don’t I have a say in how my works will be distributed and modified to withold the purpose and vision of my works that is originally created? The question remains until further enhancement in this concept will be done.