first

1 files changed, 188 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/docs/selling.md b/docs/selling.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..0c9ba1c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/docs/selling.md
@@ -0,0 +1,188 @@
+---
+Generator: 'texi2html 1.82'
+description: Untitled Document
+distribution: global
+keywords: Untitled Document
+resource-type: document
+title: Untitled Document
+...
+
+1. Selling Free Software {#selling-free-software .chapter}
+========================
+
+Many people believe that the spirit of the GNU Project is that you
+should not charge money for distributing copies of software, or that you
+should charge as little as possible—just enough to cover the cost. This
+is a misunderstanding.
+
+Actually, we encourage people who redistribute free
+software[(1)](#FOOT1) to charge as much as they wish or can. If a
+license does not permit users to make copies and sell them, it is a
+nonfree license. If this seems surprising to you, please read on.
+
+The word “free” has two legitimate general meanings; it can refer either
+to freedom or to price. When we speak of “free software”, we’re talking
+about freedom, not price. (Think of “free speech”, not “free beer”.)
+Specifically, it means that a user is free to run the program, change
+the program, and redistribute the program with or without changes.
+
+Free programs are sometimes distributed gratis, and sometimes for a
+substantial price. Often the same program is available in both ways from
+different places. The program is free regardless of the price, because
+users have freedom in using it.
+
+Nonfree programs[(2)](#FOOT2) are usually sold for a high price, but
+sometimes a store will give you a copy at no charge. That doesn’t make
+it free software, though. Price or no price, the program is nonfree
+because its users are denied freedom.
+
+@firstcopyingnotice{{@footnoterule @smallskip For some views on the
+ideas of selling exceptions to free software licenses, such as the GNU
+GPL, see @pageref{Exceptions}. @medskip @footnoterule @smallskip
+Copyright © 1996–1998, 2001, 2007, 2015 Free Software Foundation, Inc.\
+ {This essay was originally published on <http://gnu.org>, in 1996. This
+version is part of @fsfsthreecite}
+
+Since free software is not a matter of price, a low price doesn’t make
+the software free, or even closer to free. So if you are redistributing
+copies of free software, you might as well charge a substantial fee and
+*make some money.* Redistributing free software is a good and legitimate
+activity; if you do it, you might as well make a profit from it.
+
+Free software is a community project, and everyone who depends on it
+ought to look for ways to contribute to building the community. For a
+distributor, the way to do this is to give a part of the profit to free
+software development projects or to the Free Software Foundation. This
+way you can advance the world of free software.
+
+**Distributing free software is an opportunity to raise funds for
+development. Don’t waste it!**
+
+In order to contribute funds, you need to have some extra. If you charge
+too low a fee, you won’t have anything to spare to support development.
+
+### Will a Higher Distribution Price Hurt Some Users? {#will-a-higher-distribution-price-hurt-some-users .subheading}
+
+People sometimes worry that a high distribution fee will put free
+software out of range for users who don’t have a lot of money. With
+proprietary software, a high price does exactly that—but free software
+is different.
+
+The difference is that free software naturally tends to spread around,
+and there are many ways to get it.
+
+Software hoarders try their damnedest to stop you from running a
+proprietary program without paying the standard price. If this price is
+high, that does make it hard for some users to use the program.
+
+With free software, users don’t *have* to pay the distribution fee in
+order to use the software. They can copy the program from a friend who
+has a copy, or with the help of a friend who has network access. Or
+several users can join together, split the price of one CD-ROM, then
+each in turn can install the software. A high CD-ROM price is not a
+major obstacle when the software is free.
+
+### Will a Higher Distribution Price Discourage Use of Free Software? {#will-a-higher-distribution-price-discourage-use-of-free-software .subheading}
+
+Another common concern is for the popularity of free software. People
+think that a high price for distribution would reduce the number of
+users, or that a low price is likely to encourage users.
+
+This is true for proprietary software—but free software is different.
+With so many ways to get copies, the price of distribution service has
+less effect on popularity.
+
+In the long run, how many people use free software is determined mainly
+by *how much free software can do,* and how easy it is to use. Many
+users do not make freedom their priority; they may continue to use
+proprietary software if free software can’t do all the jobs they want
+done. Thus, if we want to increase the number of users in the long run,
+we should above all *develop more free software.*
+
+The most direct way to do this is by writing needed free
+software[(3)](#FOOT3) or manuals[(4)](#FOOT4) yourself. But if you do
+distribution rather than writing, the best way you can help is by
+raising funds for others to write them.
+
+### The Term “Selling Software” Can Be Confusing Too {#the-term-selling-software-can-be-confusing-too .subheading}
+
+Strictly speaking, “selling” means trading goods for money. Selling a
+copy of a free program is legitimate, and we encourage it.
+
+However, when people think of “selling software,”[(5)](#FOOT5) they
+usually imagine doing it the way most companies do it: making the
+software proprietary rather than free.
+
+So unless you’re going to draw distinctions carefully, the way this
+article does, we suggest it is better to avoid using the term “selling
+software” and choose some other wording instead. For example, you could
+say “distributing free software for a fee”—that is unambiguous.
+
+### High or Low Fees, and the GNU GPL {#high-or-low-fees-and-the-gnu-gpl .subheading}
+
+Except for one special situation, the GNU General Public License (GNU
+GPL) has no requirements about how much you can charge for distributing
+a copy of free software. You can charge nothing, a penny, a dollar, or a
+billion dollars. It’s up to you, and the marketplace, so don’t complain
+to us if nobody wants to pay a billion dollars for a copy.
+
+The one exception is in the case where binaries are distributed without
+the corresponding complete source code. Those who do this are required
+by the GNU GPL to provide source code on subsequent request. Without a
+limit on the fee[(6)](#FOOT6) for the source code, they would be able
+set a fee too large for anyone to pay—such as a billion dollars—and thus
+pretend to release source code while in truth concealing it. So in this
+case we have to limit the fee for source in order to ensure the user’s
+freedom. In ordinary situations, however, there is no such justification
+for limiting distribution fees, so we do not limit them.
+
+Sometimes companies whose activities cross the line stated in the GNU
+GPL plead for permission, saying that they “won’t charge money for the
+GNU software” or such like. That won’t get them anywhere with us. Free
+software is about freedom, and enforcing the GPL is defending freedom.
+When we defend users’ freedom, we are not distracted by side issues such
+as how much of a distribution fee is charged. Freedom is the issue, the
+whole issue, and the only issue.
+
+<div class="footnote">
+
+------------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+### Footnotes
+
+### [(1)](#DOCF1)
+
+@raggedright See @pageref{Definition} for the full definition of free
+software. @end raggedright
+
+### [(2)](#DOCF2)
+
+@raggedright Also known as “proprietary software.” See @pageref{Category
+Proprietary Software} for more on this category of software. @end
+raggedright
+
+### [(3)](#DOCF3)
+
+@raggedright See the Savannah Task List, at
+<http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/tasklist>. @end raggedright
+
+### [(4)](#DOCF4)
+
+@raggedright See <http://gnu.org/doc/doc.html>. @end raggedright
+
+### [(5)](#DOCF5)
+
+@raggedright See @pageref{Sell Software} for more on how the expression
+“sell software” is ambiguous. @end raggedright
+
+### [(6)](#DOCF6)
+
+@raggedright See section 6 of the GNU GPL (@pageref{GPL S6}). @end
+raggedright
+
+</div>
+
+------------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+This document was generated by *tonghuix* on *March 25, 2016* using
+[*texi2html 1.82*](http://www.nongnu.org/texi2html/).\