Per George Carlin, “Selling is legal. Fucking is legal. Why isn’t selling fucking legal? You know, why should it be illegal to sell something that’s perfectly legal to give away?”
No, really, I saw that in the OP. I just wanted to get the exact line in. :smack:
In reality sex is scarcely ever, if ever, free. Actual remuneration and costs vary wildly, however.
That’s .sig worthy.
In some states, a gas station can’t sell gas at a price so low that it loses money on the transaction. This is to prevent monopolistic practices. A large gas station chain could drive a small gas station chain (which was its only competition) out of business by pricing gas so low that it lost money just in the area where the small chain has gas stations. It could sustain that because it was making a profit elsewhere. After it had put the small chain out of business, it could then raise the price by a whole lot since it no longer had any competition. I presume that it’s then illegal to give gas away in the states with that law.
This must not apply to doctors, then; I got a few samples of Percocet after I had my wisdom teeth taken out.
I’ll add the labor of the underaged to the list.
Also, in some states people aren’t allowed to perform certain jobs (meat cutter, medical assistant) without a license, but it’s legal for someone to cut meat or help the disabled in their spare time. And what about teaching? Some states don’t make homeschooling parents pass any certification tests, but they couldn’t get a job in a school that paid them without those tests. So a layman could give away education for free, but not get paid for it.
Ah, Walmart economics.
Promo CDS. Every one I have ever bought states clearly that selling it is illegal. 
A ride. You can pick up hitch-hikers and take them all over the place for free, but if you start charging them without jumping through the necessary hoops to get a taxi license, you’re subject to prosecution.
And from state to state there are sometimes ways around that. I have seen situations where there is free beer, for instance, but the cups sell for $15.00.
There has been freeware programs whose license prohibited people from making a profit from them. For example, DikuMUD.
In Alaska its legal to give away your sport caught fish but illegal to sell it. Same with moose, venison, bear etc.
Its also legal in Alaska to possess & grow up to 4 oz. of marijuana and share with consenting adults, in the privacy of your own home (with no children present), but its illegal to transport or sell in any way, shape or form.
In Alaska its legal to give away your sport caught fish but illegal to sell it. Same with moose, venison, bear etc.
Its also legal in Alaska to possess & grow up to 4 oz. of marijuana and share with consenting adults, in the privacy of your own home (with no children present), but its illegal to transport or sell in any way, shape or form.
Taxidermy work (sort of).
You can GIVE AWAY a stuffed specimin (like at an auction or a raffle) but you cannot sell it to someone else. There are some weird rules about taxidermy businesses. You can take a bird that you shot to a taxidermist and have them stuff it and charge you for stuffing it, but you can’t actually buy a pre-stuffed specimin from them.
Jack Daniels Distillery for many years did give a bottle to all in it’s employ. In the county the distillery is located it is illegal to sell alcohol.
First, the GPL isn’t related to freeware. As Stallman has pointed out many, many times since he invented it, the GPL is about ‘Free as in Freedom’. The GPL says nothing about price. Freeware is a different concept entirely.
[ul]
[li]Freeware: Software given away in binary form, without source code and without any additional permissions granted to those who recieve it beyond what they possess under copyright law and common law. Modification is not allowed, and generally not really possible as source code is not available.[/li][li]Free Software: Software that is available in source form (and perhaps incidentally as pre-compiled binaries), with a license that grants the recipients additional privileges beyond what copyright law and common law grant them. The GPL allows you to modify the software, first of all, and it allows you to redistribute the modified versions as long as you do not erase the names of the other contributors or otherwise try to steal credit. You can set the price as high as you want, as long as you can find a market.[/li][/ul]
Second, people do sell Free Software all the time. Red Hat, for example, sells Fedora and Patrick Volkerding sells Slackware, and that’s just two well-known Linux distros. People buy from them because it’s a good way to get pre-packaged software of known quality that has been tested and will work together. Red Hat, in addition, also provides support for people who buy from them. It’s a hell of a lot more convenient than downloading everything, and it’s even faster than downloading the ISO images of the CD-ROMs they provide. Plus, the Linux community sees the value in supporting those business models: We get a lot of value out of the software itself and out of the packaging, and we want to ensure it keeps coming.
It is not foolish to buy Free Software. I’d argue that it’s foolish to buy non-Free Software.
I disagree with that statement. I argue that Red Hat doesn’t build their business on selling Linux or the other GPL-licensed software that makes up Fedora, rather, as you suggested, they sell support, testing, documentation, etc. for it. The example I gave is intended to illustrate the flaw in the original blanket statement that selling freeware of any kind is illegal. The FSF defines freeware as no-source no-rights, but surely you must admit the FSF has an agenda here in biasing their definition. And unless FatBaldGuy clarifies what, specifically, he had in mind by his use of “freeware”, we could keep going around about the “real” definition of the word.
I still mantain that FatBaldGuy’s example is incorrect since it is far too broad. Another example: if I’m at a trade show or similar and a vendor hands me a CD with some of their “freeware” on it while I’m walking by their booth, and I decide I don’t really want it, I can sell it to someone else if I want. No restriction was placed on my use of the media or contents when I recieved it, and I haven’t agreed to any EULAs that would be presented during installation or use.
Disagree all you want, it’s true. I’ve bought Free Software (Linux distros and one version of OpenBSD) many times in my life and I plan to do so again. I have some good reasons for doing so:
[ul]
[li]Bandwidth: I have always sat at the end of a bad dial-up connection. I am, for all practical intents and purposes, unable to download an ISO image or an appreciably large amount of compressed tarballs. The Linux kernel alone strains my connection’s reliability and my patience.[/li][li]Ethics, aka Self-Interest: I have gotten a lot of value out of Free Software over the years. I have an interest in encouraging anyone who gives me value, as it makes it more likely they will keep doing so. Buying CDs is a simple way to do that.[/li][li]Convenience: This goes beyond bandwidth. By buying a CD-ROM, I have a known-good copy of all essential system software if I need to restore a system. I also have documentation and prebuilt binaries. Plus, I don’t have to fiddle with burning a CD (it isn’t hard, I just never seem to have a blank when I need one) or clearing hard drive space (ISOs are meaty chunks of bits).[/li][/ul]I don’t think any of those reasons are foolish.
No more than you do. The point the FSF is making is that there is a real practical, legal, and ethical difference in what they do (which they like to call Free Software) and the traditional definition of freeware. Saying they’re biased doesn’t negate or make irrelevant that distinction.
And I submit that it’s a bad example because Free Software isn’t freeware by any traditional understanding of the term. Your point is valid, your example is not.
In the mid-80’s in Maryland, a radio station would have a promotion where they would give away free beers. They did this once at a bar near where I worked, but they were charging $0.01 per beer. I was talking to the manager (I was a regular there) and he told me the state told them it was illegal to give away beer so they had to charge something for it.
A waitress there was rather perturbed when one cheapskate ordered two beers, gave her a nickel, and wanted his change.
Video or DVD performances - the little screen at the start tells you that it is for home viewers only, with no paying audience. I can invite you all round to watch a movie (although I’d need a bigger living room), but I can’t charge you for the privilege.
That is also true for milk in Massachusetts (or at least was a couple years ago).
- As continuity said, many, many, professional services can be done for free, but only sold with a license. Though for that matter, in some places you need a vending license to sell anything and if you’re making a business of it, you’ve got a lot of other hoops to jump through – reporting corporate income tax, collecting sales tax (if applicable), etc. etc. So maybe ‘legal but only with a license’ is too big a category to fit.