- About Us
Example: RedHat has a small army of people working on GCC, but the FSF owns *all* the (copy)rights. The FSF does not have a *single* developer working on GCC!!!
RedHat knows this and yet they still pay this "small army" to work on GCC. RedHat is a business. They must see a financial benefit to working on GCC or they would not be doing it, even though the FSF owns the copyright.
Today, the FSF is a redundant organisation trying to claim credit for things they did not do and owning more software than what they have morally the right to.
They don't own any software. They own copyrights to software. However, because that software is under the GPL, I can do what I want with it (within the licence) and the FSF could not stop me even if they wanted to.
Your arguments are just FUD against the FSF.
What do you really have against the FSF? What did they do to you?