shouldbefree.html - en to hr translation catalogue (148 entries)

note: type: Content of: <title>
en: Why Software Should Be Free - GNU Project - Free Software Foundation
hr: Zašto bi softver trebao biti slobodan - Projekt GNU - Zaklada za slobodan softver

note: type: Content of: <div><h2>
en: Why Software Should Be Free
hr: Zašto bi softver trebao biti slobodan

note: type: Content of: <div><address>
en: by <a href="https://www.stallman.org/">Richard Stallman</a>
hr: napisao <a href="https://www.stallman.org/">Richard Stallman</a>

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: The existence of software inevitably raises the question of how decisions about its use should be made.  For example, suppose one individual who has a copy of a program meets another who would like a copy.  It is possible for them to copy the program; who should decide whether this is done? The individuals involved? Or another party, called the &ldquo;owner&rdquo;?
hr: Postojanje slobodnog softvera neizbježno postavlja pitanje o tome kako bi trebalo donositi odluke o njegovom korištenju. Na primjer, pretpostavimo da jedna osoba koja ima primjerak nekog programa sretne drugu osobu koja bi također željela primjerak tog programa. U mogućnosti su kopirati taj program; tko bi trebao odlučiti hoće li to i učiniti? Dotične osobe? Ili treća strana, koju nazivamo &ldquo;vlasnikom&rdquo;?

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Software developers typically consider these questions on the assumption that the criterion for the answer is to maximize developers' profits. The political power of business has led to the government adoption of both this criterion and the answer proposed by the developers: that the program has an owner, typically a corporation associated with its development.
hr: Razvijatelji softvera u razmatranju ovih pitanja uglavnom kreću od pretpostavke da se odgovor temelji na kriteriju najveće moguće dobiti za razvijatelja. Politička moć poslovnih krugova dovela je do toga da vlasti usvoje i ovaj kriterij i odgovor kojeg su predložili razvijatelji: da program ima vlasnika, tipično neku korporaciju povezanu s njegovim razvojem.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: I would like to consider the same question using a different criterion: the prosperity and freedom of the public in general.
hr: Želio bih isto pitanje razmotriti na temelju drugačijeg kriterija: napretka i slobode javnosti općenito.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: This answer cannot be decided by current law&mdash;the law should conform to ethics, not the other way around.  Nor does current practice decide this question, although it may suggest possible answers.  The only way to judge is to see who is helped and who is hurt by recognizing owners of software, why, and how much.  In other words, we should perform a cost-benefit analysis on behalf of society as a whole, taking account of individual freedom as well as production of material goods.
hr: Odgovor na ovo ne može nam dati trenutni zakon&mdash;zakon bi trebao biti prilagođen etici, a ne obratno. Odluku o tom pitanju ne može donijeti ni trenutna praksa, premda bi mogla predložiti moguće odgovore. Jedini način na koji se može donijeti odluka je pogledati na čiju je korist i na čiju štetu priznavanje vlasništva nad softverom, zašto i u kojoj mjeri. Drugim riječima, trebali bismo izvršiti analizu odnosa cijene i dobrobiti za društvo kao cjelinu, uzimajući u obzir osobnu slobodu kao i proizvodnju materijalnih dobara.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: In this essay, I will describe the effects of having owners, and show that the results are detrimental.  My conclusion is that programmers have the duty to encourage others to share, redistribute, study, and improve the software we write: in other words, to write <a href="/philosophy/free-sw.html">&ldquo;free&rdquo; software</a>.<a href="#f1">(1)</a>
hr: U ovom eseju opisat ću učinak vlasništva i pokazati da je takav ishod štetan. Moj zaključak je da programeri imaju dužnost poticati druge da dijele, dalje distribuiraju, proučavaju i poboljšavaju softver kojeg pišu: drugim riječima, da pišu <a href="/philosophy/free-sw.html">&ldquo;slobodan&rdquo; softver</a>.<a href="#f1">(1)</a>

note: type: Content of: <div><h3>
en: How Owners Justify Their Power
hr: Kako vlasnici opravdavaju svoju moć

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Those who benefit from the current system where programs are property offer two arguments in support of their claims to own programs: the emotional argument and the economic argument.
hr: Oni koji imaju koristi od sadašnjeg sustava, u kojem programi predstavljaju imovinu, iznose dva razloga kojima podupiru svoje zahtjeve za vlasništvom nad programima: emocionalni razlog i ekonomski razlog.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: The emotional argument goes like this: &ldquo;I put my sweat, my heart, my soul into this program.  It comes from <em>me</em>, it's <em>mine</em>!&rdquo;
hr: Emocionalni razlog glasi ovako: &ldquo;Ulažem svoj znoj, svoje srce i dušu u ovaj program. Njega stvaram <em>ja</em>, on je <em>moj</em>!&rdquo;

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: This argument does not require serious refutation.  The feeling of attachment is one that programmers can cultivate when it suits them; it is not inevitable.  Consider, for example, how willingly the same programmers usually sign over all rights to a large corporation for a salary; the emotional attachment mysteriously vanishes.  By contrast, consider the great artists and artisans of medieval times, who didn't even sign their names to their work.  To them, the name of the artist was not important.  What mattered was that the work was done&mdash;and the purpose it would serve.  This view prevailed for hundreds of years.
hr: Ovaj razlog ne zahtijeva ozbiljno pobijanje. Osjećaj privrženosti je osjećaj kojeg programeri mogu njegovati kad im odgovara; nije neizbježan. Pogledajmo, na primjer, koliko rado isti ti programeri za plaću uobičajeno prepišu sva prava na neku veliku korporaciju; emocionalna privrženost tajnovito nestane. Suprotno tome, pogledajmo kako veliki umjetnici srednjeg vijeka nisu stavljali na svoja djela ni svoje ime. Njima ime umjetnika nije bilo važno. Ono što je bilo važno je to da je djelo bilo napravljeno&mdash;i svrha kojoj će služiti. To gledište prevladavalo je stoljećima.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: The economic argument goes like this: &ldquo;I want to get rich (usually described inaccurately as &lsquo;making a living&rsquo;), and if you don't allow me to get rich by programming, then I won't program.  Everyone else is like me, so nobody will ever program.  And then you'll be stuck with no programs at all!&rdquo; This threat is usually veiled as friendly advice from the wise.
hr: Ekonomski razlog glasi ovako: &ldquo;Želim se obogatiti (obično neprecizno opisano kao &lsquo;zaraditi za život&rsquo;), a ako mi ne dozvolite da se obogatim programiranjem, onda neću programirati. Svi drugi su kao i ja, dakle nitko nikada neće programirati. Stoga nećete uopće imati programa!&rdquo; Ova je prijetnja obično umotana kao prijateljski savjet mudrih.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: I'll explain later why this threat is a bluff.  First I want to address an implicit assumption that is more visible in another formulation of the argument.
hr: Kasnije ću objasniti zašto je ova prijetnja varka. Najprije se želim pozabaviti implicitnom pretpostavkom koja je vidljivija u drugačijem izboru riječi kojima se izražava ovaj razlog.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: This formulation starts by comparing the social utility of a proprietary program with that of no program, and then concludes that proprietary software development is, on the whole, beneficial, and should be encouraged.  The fallacy here is in comparing only two outcomes&mdash;proprietary software versus no software&mdash;and assuming there are no other possibilities.
hr: Ovaj izraz započinje usporedbom društvene korisnosti vlasničkog programa s onim kada nemamo nikakvog programa, a zatim zaključuje da ja razvoj vlasničkog softvera, u cjelini, koristan i da bi ga trebalo poticati. Zabluda je ovdje u usporedbi samo dva ishoda&mdash;situaciji s vlasničkim softverom nasuprot situaciji bez ikakvog softvera&mdash;i pretpostavljanja da ne postoje druge mogućnosti.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Given a system of software copyright, software development is usually linked with the existence of an owner who controls the software's use.  As long as this linkage exists, we are often faced with the choice of proprietary software or none.  However, this linkage is not inherent or inevitable; it is a consequence of the specific social/legal policy decision that we are questioning: the decision to have owners.  To formulate the choice as between proprietary software versus no software is begging the question.
hr: U sustavu softverskih autorskih prava, razvoj softvera se obično povezuje s postojanjem vlasnika koji kontrolira korištenje softvera. Sve dok ta veza postoji, često smo suočeni s izborom između vlasničkog softvera i ničega. Međutim, ova veza nije nerazdvojiva niti neizbježna; ona je posljedica određene društveno-pravne političke odluke koju preispitujemo: odluke da postoje vlasnici. Izražavanje izbora kao ovog između vlasničkog softvera nasuprot nikakvom softveru vapi za preispitivanjem.

note: type: Content of: <div><h3>
en: The Argument against Having Owners
hr: Argument protiv postojanja vlasnika

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: The question at hand is, &ldquo;Should development of software be linked with having owners to restrict the use of it?&rdquo;
hr: Pitanje koje se nameće je &ldquo;Treba li razvoj softvera biti povezan s postojanjem vlasnika koji ograničavaju njegovo korištenje?&rdquo;

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: In order to decide this, we have to judge the effect on society of each of those two activities <em>independently</em>: the effect of developing the software (regardless of its terms of distribution), and the effect of restricting its use (assuming the software has been developed).  If one of these activities is helpful and the other is harmful, we would be better off dropping the linkage and doing only the helpful one.
hr: Da bismo donijeli odluku o ovome, moramo procijeniti kakav učinak na društvo ima svaka od ovih dviju radnji <em>neovisno jedna o drugoj</em>: učinak razvijanja softvera (neovisno o njegovim uvjetima distribucije) i učinak ograničavanja njegovog korištenja (pretpostavljajući da je softver već razvijen). Ako je jedna od ovih radnji korisna, a druga je štetna, bilo bi bolje da ih razdvojimo i činimo samo onu korisnu.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: To put it another way, if restricting the distribution of a program already developed is harmful to society overall, then an ethical software developer will reject the option of doing so.
hr: Drugačije rečeno, ako je ograničavanje distribuiranja programa koji je već razvijen štetno za društvo općenito, tada će etički razvijatelj softvera odbaciti mogućnost da to čini.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: To determine the effect of restricting sharing, we need to compare the value to society of a restricted (i.e., proprietary) program with that of the same program, available to everyone.  This means comparing two possible worlds.
hr: Da bismo odredili učinak ograničavanja dijeljenja, trebamo usporediti vrijednost za društvo koju ima ograničeni (tj. vlasnički) program s onom vrijednošću koju ima isti takav program koji je dostupan svima. Ta znači usporediti dva moguća svijeta.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: This analysis also addresses the simple counterargument sometimes made that &ldquo;the benefit to the neighbor of giving him or her a copy of a program is cancelled by the harm done to the owner.&rdquo; This counterargument assumes that the harm and the benefit are equal in magnitude.  The analysis involves comparing these magnitudes, and shows that the benefit is much greater.
hr: Ova analiza također rješava i jednostavan protuargument, koji se ponekad iznosi, da je &ldquo;korist koju ima susjed kojem damo kopiju nekog programa poništena štetom učinjenom vlasniku.&rdquo; Ovaj protuargument pretpostavlja da su i šteta i korist jednako velike. Analiza uključuje usporedbu ovih veličina, te pokazuje da je korist mnogo veća.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: To elucidate this argument, let's apply it in another area: road construction.
hr: Da rasvijetlimo ovaj argument, primijenimo ga na drugo područje: izgradnju ceste.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: It would be possible to fund the construction of all roads with tolls. This would entail having toll booths at all street corners.  Such a system would provide a great incentive to improve roads.  It would also have the virtue of causing the users of any given road to pay for that road.  However, a toll booth is an artificial obstruction to smooth driving&mdash;artificial, because it is not a consequence of how roads or cars work.
hr: Bilo bi moguće financirati izgradnju svih cesta naplatom cestarine. To bi zahtijevalo da imamo naplatne kućice na svim raskrižjima. Takav bi sustav pružio velik poticaj za poboljšavanje cesta. Imao bi također i svojstvo uzrokovanja da korisnici bilo koje ceste plaćaju za tu cestu. Međutim, naplatna kućica je umjetna prepreka glatkom odvijanju prometa&mdash;umjetna, jer nije posljedica toga kako ceste ili automobili funkcioniraju.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Comparing free roads and toll roads by their usefulness, we find that (all else being equal) roads without toll booths are cheaper to construct, cheaper to run, safer, and more efficient to use.<a href="#f2">(2)</a> In a poor country, tolls may make the roads unavailable to many citizens.  The roads without toll booths thus offer more benefit to society at less cost; they are preferable for society.  Therefore, society should choose to fund roads in another way, not by means of toll booths.  Use of roads, once built, should be free.
hr: Uspoređujući slobodne ceste i ceste s naplatom cestarine, otkrivamo da su (ako je sve ostalo jednako) ceste bez naplatnih kućica jeftinije za izgradnju, jeftinije za upravljanje, sigurnije i učinkovitije.<a href="#f2">(2)</a> U siromašnoj zemlji, cestarine mogu učiniti ceste nedostupne mnogim građanima. Ceste bez naplatnih kućica stoga nude više dobrobiti društvu za nižu cijenu; bolje su za društvo. Stoga, društvo bi trebalo odabrati financirati ceste na drugačiji način, a ne naplatnim kućicama. Korištenje cesta, jednom kad su izgrađene, mora biti slobodno.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: When the advocates of toll booths propose them as <em>merely</em> a way of raising funds, they distort the choice that is available.  Toll booths do raise funds, but they do something else as well: in effect, they degrade the road.  The toll road is not as good as the free road; giving us more or technically superior roads may not be an improvement if this means substituting toll roads for free roads.
hr: Kada zagovornici naplatnih kućica predlažu njihovo korištenje <em>samo</em> kao način prikupljanja sredstava, oni iskrivljuju izbor koji je dostupan. Naplatne kućice zaista prikupljaju sredstva, no čine i nešto drugo: u suštini, one degradiraju cestu. Cesta s naplatom cestarine nije tako dobra kao slobodna cesta; dobivanje tehnički savršenijih cesta ne mora biti poboljšanje ako to znači zamjenjivanje slobodnih cesta onima s naplatom cestarine.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Of course, the construction of a free road does cost money, which the public must somehow pay.  However, this does not imply the inevitability of toll booths.  We who must in either case pay will get more value for our money by buying a free road.
hr: Naravno, izgradnja slobodne ceste ipak košta, što javnost mora nekako platiti. Međutim, to ne podrazumijeva neizbježnost naplatnih kućica. Mi, koji ionako moramo platiti, dobit ćemo više za naš novac kupujući slobodnu cestu.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: I am not saying that a toll road is worse than no road at all.  That would be true if the toll were so great that hardly anyone used the road&mdash;but this is an unlikely policy for a toll collector.  However, as long as the toll booths cause significant waste and inconvenience, it is better to raise the funds in a less obstructive fashion.
hr: Ne kažem da je lošije imati cestu s naplatom cestarine nego uopće ne imati cestu. To bi bila istina kada bi cestarina bila toliko visoka da bi rijetko tko mogao koristiti tu cestu&mdash;no to nije naročito vjerojatna politika onih koji naplaćuju cestarine. Međutim, dokle god naplatne kućice uzrokuju značajno rasipanje i neugodnost, bolje je skupiti novčana sredstva na manje ometajući način.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: To apply the same argument to software development, I will now show that having &ldquo;toll booths&rdquo; for useful software programs costs society dearly: it makes the programs more expensive to construct, more expensive to distribute, and less satisfying and efficient to use.  It will follow that program construction should be encouraged in some other way.  Then I will go on to explain other methods of encouraging and (to the extent actually necessary) funding software development.
hr: Kako bih primijenio isti argument na razvoj softvera, sada ću pokazati da postojanje &ldquo;naplatnih kućica&rdquo; za korisne softverske programe društvo skupo stoji: to čini programe skupljima za izradu, skupljima za distribuciju i manje ugodnima i učinkovitima za korištenje. Iz toga slijedi da izradu programa treba poticati na neki drugi način. Zato ću objasniti druge načine poticanja i (do mjere koja je potrebna) financiranja razvoja softvera.

note: type: Content of: <div><h4>
en: The Harm Done by Obstructing Software
hr: Šteta koju nanosi opstrukcija softvera

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Consider for a moment that a program has been developed, and any necessary payments for its development have been made; now society must choose either to make it proprietary or allow free sharing and use.  Assume that the existence of the program and its availability is a desirable thing.<a href="#f3">(3)</a>
hr: Razmotrimo na trenutak da je program razvijen i da su svi nužni troškovi za njegov razvoj plaćeni; sada društvo treba izabrati hoće li ga učiniti vlasničkim ili dozvoliti slobodno dijeljenje i korištenje. Pretpostavimo da je postojanje programa i njegova dostupnost poželjna stvar.<a href="#f3">(3)</a>

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Restrictions on the distribution and modification of the program cannot facilitate its use.  They can only interfere.  So the effect can only be negative.  But how much? And what kind?
hr: Ograničenja distribucije i mijenjanja programa ne mogu olakšati njegovo korištenje. Oni mogu samo stvarati smetnju. Učinak stoga može biti samo negativan. No, koliko? I kakve vrste?

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Three different levels of material harm come from such obstruction:
hr: Tri različite razine materijalne štete dolaze od takve opstrukcije:

note: type: Content of: <div><ul><li>
en: Fewer people use the program.
hr: Manje ljudi koristi program.

note: type: Content of: <div><ul><li>
en: None of the users can adapt or fix the program.
hr: Nitko od korisnika ne može prilagoditi ili ispraviti program.

note: type: Content of: <div><ul><li>
en: Other developers cannot learn from the program, or base new work on it.
hr: Drugi razvijatelji ne mogu učiti iz programa niti temeljiti novo djelo na njemu.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Each level of material harm has a concomitant form of psychosocial harm. This refers to the effect that people's decisions have on their subsequent feelings, attitudes, and predispositions.  These changes in people's ways of thinking will then have a further effect on their relationships with their fellow citizens, and can have material consequences.
hr: Svaka razina materijalne štete ima prateći oblik psihosocijalne štete. Ovo se odnosi na posljedice koje ljudske odluke imaju na njihove buduće osjećaje, stavove i sklonosti. Ove promjene u načinu razmišljanja ljudi će zatim imati daljnje posljedice na njihove odnose sa sugrađanima, a mogu imati i materijalne posljedice.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: The three levels of material harm waste part of the value that the program could contribute, but they cannot reduce it to zero.  If they waste nearly all the value of the program, then writing the program harms society by at most the effort that went into writing the program.  Arguably a program that is profitable to sell must provide some net direct material benefit.
hr: Ove tri razine materijalne štete rasipaju dio vrijednosti kojom je program mogao doprinijeti, no ne mogu je potpuno poništiti. Ukoliko rasipaju gotovo svu vrijednost programa, onda pisanje programa nanosi štetu društvu maksimalno u visini truda uloženog u pisanje programa. Nedvojbeno, program koji je profitabilan za prodaju mora pružiti neku izravnu materijalnu korist.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: However, taking account of the concomitant psychosocial harm, there is no limit to the harm that proprietary software development can do.
hr: Međutim, uzimajući u obzir prateću psihosocijalnu štetu, nema granica šteti koju razvoj vlasničkog softvera može učiniti.

note: type: Content of: <div><h4>
en: Obstructing Use of Programs
hr: Opstrukcija korištenja programa

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: The first level of harm impedes the simple use of a program.  A copy of a program has nearly zero marginal cost (and you can pay this cost by doing the work yourself), so in a free market, it would have nearly zero price.  A license fee is a significant disincentive to use the program.  If a widely useful program is proprietary, far fewer people will use it.
hr: Prva razina štete ometa jednostavno korištenje programa. Trošak kopije programa je gotovo nula (a taj posao možete platiti i tako da ga sami odradite), stoga bi na slobodnom tržištu imao cijenu blizu nuli. Naknada za autorska prava djeluje značajno destimulirajuće na korištenje programa. Ako je neki široko korišten program vlasnički, daleko manje ljudi će ga koristiti.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: It is easy to show that the total contribution of a program to society is reduced by assigning an owner to it.  Each potential user of the program, faced with the need to pay to use it, may choose to pay, or may forego use of the program.  When a user chooses to pay, this is a zero-sum transfer of wealth between two parties.  But each time someone chooses to forego use of the program, this harms that person without benefiting anyone.  The sum of negative numbers and zeros must be negative.
hr: Lako je pokazati da je ukupan doprinos programa društvu umanjen ako mu se odredi vlasnik. Svaki potencijalni korisnik programa, suočen s potrebom da plati za njegovo korištenje, može izabrati plaćanje ili se može odreći korištenja programa. Kada korisnik odabere platiti, vrijednost prijenosa dobara između dviju strana je nula. No svaki put kada netko izabere odreći se korištenja programa, to šteti toj osobi, a ne donosi dobrobit nikome. Zbroj negativnih vrijednosti s nulama mora biti negativan.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: But this does not reduce the amount of work it takes to <em>develop</em> the program.  As a result, the efficiency of the whole process, in delivered user satisfaction per hour of work, is reduced.
hr: No to ne umanjuje količinu rada koja je potrebna za <em>razvoj</em> programa. Kao posljedica, učinkovitost cijelog procesa, mjerena zadovoljstvom korisnika u odnosu na sat rada, smanjena je.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: This reflects a crucial difference between copies of programs and cars, chairs, or sandwiches.  There is no copying machine for material objects outside of science fiction.  But programs are easy to copy; anyone can produce as many copies as are wanted, with very little effort.  This isn't true for material objects because matter is conserved: each new copy has to be built from raw materials in the same way that the first copy was built.
hr: Ovo odražava presudnu razliku između kopija programa i automobila, stolica ili sendviča. Izvan znanstveno-fantastične literature ne postoji uređaj za kopiranje materijalnih objekata. No programe je jednostavno kopirati; svatko može proizvesti koliko god kopija je potrebno, uz vrlo malo truda. To ne vrijedi za materijalne objekte zbog zakona o očuvanju materije: svaka nova kopija mora biti izrađena od sirovina na isti način na koji je izrađena i prva kopija.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: With material objects, a disincentive to use them makes sense, because fewer objects bought means less raw material and work needed to make them.  It's true that there is usually also a startup cost, a development cost, which is spread over the production run.  But as long as the marginal cost of production is significant, adding a share of the development cost does not make a qualitative difference.  And it does not require restrictions on the freedom of ordinary users.
hr: Kod materijalnih objekata, destimuliranje korištenja ima smisla, jer manje kupljenih objekata znači i manje sirovina i rada potrebnih da bi ih se izradilo. Istina je da postoji i početni trošak, trošak razvoja, koji se raspoređuje na količinu proizvodnje. No sve dok je granični trošak proizvodnje značajan, dodavanje dijela troška razvoja ne čini kvalitativnu razliku. Isto tako ne zahtijeva ograničenja slobode običnih korisnika.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: However, imposing a price on something that would otherwise be free is a qualitative change.  A centrally imposed fee for software distribution becomes a powerful disincentive.
hr: Međutim, nametanje cijene na nešto što bi inače bilo besplatno kvalitativna je promjena. Središnje nametnuta naknada za distribuciju softvera postaje snažno destimulirajuća.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: What's more, central production as now practiced is inefficient even as a means of delivering copies of software.  This system involves enclosing physical disks or tapes in superfluous packaging, shipping large numbers of them around the world, and storing them for sale.  This cost is presented as an expense of doing business; in truth, it is part of the waste caused by having owners.
hr: Štoviše, središnja proizvodnja kakva se sada prakticira neučinkovita je čak i kao sredstvo isporuke primjeraka softvera. Ovaj sustav uključuje stavljanje fizičkih diskova ili kaseta u suvišna pakiranja, slanje velikog broja njih oko svijeta i njihovog skladištenja za prodaju. Ovaj trošak prikazan je kao rashod u poslovanju; istina je zapravo da je to dio rasipanja uzrokovanog vlasništvom.

note: type: Content of: <div><h4>
en: Damaging Social Cohesion
hr: Nanošenje štete društvenoj koheziji

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Suppose that both you and your neighbor would find it useful to run a certain program.  In ethical concern for your neighbor, you should feel that proper handling of the situation will enable both of you to use it.  A proposal to permit only one of you to use the program, while restraining the other, is divisive; neither you nor your neighbor should find it acceptable.
hr: Pretpostavimo da biste i vi i vaš susjed smatrali korisnim upotrebljavati određeni program. Iz etičke brige za vašeg susjeda, trebali biste osjećati da će ispravno upravljanje situacijom omogućiti obojici da ga koristite. Zahtjev da se korištenje programa dozvoli samo jednom od vas, a spriječi drugom, razdorna je; ni vi niti vaš susjed ne biste ga trebali smatrati prihvatljivim.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Signing a typical software license agreement means betraying your neighbor: &ldquo;I promise to deprive my neighbor of this program so that I can have a copy for myself.&rdquo; People who make such choices feel internal psychological pressure to justify them, by downgrading the importance of helping one's neighbors&mdash;thus public spirit suffers. This is psychosocial harm associated with the material harm of discouraging use of the program.
hr: Prihvaćanje tipičnog softverskog licenčnog ugovora znači izdaju vašeg susjeda: &ldquo;Obećajem lišiti svojeg susjeda ovog programa kako bih mogao imati kopiju za sebe.&rdquo; Ljudi koji čine ovakve izbore osjećaju unutarnji psihološki pritisak da ih opravdaju, umanjivanjem važnosti pomaganja svojem susjedu&mdash;stoga trpi javni duh. Ovo je psihološka šteta udružena s materijalnom štetom kao posljedice destimuliranja korištenja programa.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Many users unconsciously recognize the wrong of refusing to share, so they decide to ignore the licenses and laws, and share programs anyway.  But they often feel guilty about doing so.  They know that they must break the laws in order to be good neighbors, but they still consider the laws authoritative, and they conclude that being a good neighbor (which they are) is naughty or shameful.  That is also a kind of psychosocial harm, but one can escape it by deciding that these licenses and laws have no moral force.
hr: Mnogi korisnici nesvjesno prepoznaju nepravdu odbijanja dijeljenja, stoga odlučuju zanemariti licence i zakone i ipak dijeliti programe. No, često zbog toga osjećaju krivnju. Znaju da moraju kršiti zakone kako bi bili dobri susjedi, ali i dalje zakone smatraju mjerodavnima, pa zaključuju da je biti dobar susjed (što oni i jesu) nešto nevaljano i sramotno. To je također vrsta psihosocijalne štete, no može se izbjeći odlukom da ove licence i zakoni nemaju moralne vrijednosti.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Programmers also suffer psychosocial harm knowing that many users will not be allowed to use their work.  This leads to an attitude of cynicism or denial.  A programmer may describe enthusiastically the work that he finds technically exciting; then when asked, &ldquo;Will I be permitted to use it?&rdquo; his face falls, and he admits the answer is no.  To avoid feeling discouraged, he either ignores this fact most of the time or adopts a cynical stance designed to minimize the importance of it.
hr: Programeri isto tako trpe psihosocijalnu štetu znajući da mnogim korisnicima neće biti dozvoljeno korištenje njihovog rada. To dovodi do ciničnog stava ili do poricanja. Programer može oduševljeno opisivati rad koji smatra tehnički uzbudljivim; zatim, ako ga upitamo &ldquo;Hoću li ga smjeti koristiti?&rdquo;, raspoloženje mu splasne i priznaje da je odgovor ne. Kako bi izbjegao osjećaj obeshrabrenosti, ili će većinu vremena ignorirati ovu činjenicu ili će usvojiti ciničan stav osmišljen kako bi umanjio njenu važnost.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Since the age of Reagan, the greatest scarcity in the United States is not technical innovation, but rather the willingness to work together for the public good.  It makes no sense to encourage the former at the expense of the latter.
hr: Od vremena Reagana, najveća nestašica u Sjedinjenim državama nisu tehničke inovacije, već volja da se zajedno radi za javno dobro. Nema smisla poticati prvo na štetu ovog drugog.

note: type: Content of: <div><h4>
en: Obstructing Custom Adaptation of Programs
hr: Opstrukcija vlastite prilagodbe programa

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: The second level of material harm is the inability to adapt programs.  The ease of modification of software is one of its great advantages over older technology.  But most commercially available software isn't available for modification, even after you buy it.  It's available for you to take it or leave it, as a black box&mdash;that is all.
hr: Druga razina materijalne štete nemogućnost je prilagodbe programa. Lakoća mijenjanja softvera jedna je od velikih prednosti nad starijom tehnologijom. No, većinu komercijalno dostupnog softvera nije moguće izmijeniti, čak i nakon što ga kupite. Možete ga uzeti ili ostaviti, kao crnu kutiju&mdash;to je sve.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: A program that you can run consists of a series of numbers whose meaning is obscure.  No one, not even a good programmer, can easily change the numbers to make the program do something different.
hr: Program kojeg možete pokretati sastoji se od nizova brojeva čije je značenje nerazgovjetno. Nitko, čak ni dobar programer, ne može jednostavno izmijeniti brojeve kako bi program radio nešto drugo.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Precisely what that source code means is not the point; the point is that it looks like algebra, and a person who knows this programming language will find it meaningful and clear.  By contrast, here is same program in executable form, on the computer I normally used when I wrote this:
hr: Što konkretno izvorni kod predstavlja nije bitno; bitno je da izgleda kao algebra, a osobi koja poznaje programski jezik bit će smislen i jasan. Suprotno tome, ovdje je isti taj program u izvršnom obliku, na računalu koje sam koristio kada sam ovo pisao:

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Source code is useful (at least potentially) to every user of a program. But most users are not allowed to have copies of the source code. Usually the source code for a proprietary program is kept secret by the owner, lest anybody else learn something from it.  Users receive only the files of incomprehensible numbers that the computer will execute. This means that only the program's owner can change the program.
hr: Izvorni kod je (barem potencijalno) koristan svakom korisniku programa. No, većini korisnika nije dozvoljeno imati kopije izvornog koda. Izvorni kod vlasničkog programa vlasnik uglavnom drži u tajnosti, da netko iz njega ne bi nešto naučio. Korisnici dobivaju samo datoteke s nerazumljivim brojevima koje će računalo izvršavati. To znači da samo vlasnik programa može izmijeniti program.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: A friend once told me of working as a programmer in a bank for about six months, writing a program similar to something that was commercially available.  She believed that if she could have gotten source code for that commercially available program, it could easily have been adapted to their needs.  The bank was willing to pay for this, but was not permitted to&mdash;the source code was a secret.  So she had to do six months of make-work, work that counts in the GNP but was actually waste.
hr: Prijateljica mi je jednom pričala kako je oko šest mjeseci radila kao programer u jednoj banci, pišući program sličan nečem što je bilo komercijalno dostupno. Bila je uvjerena da bi, kada bi mogla dobiti izvorni kod tog komercijalno dostupnog programa, on mogao biti lako prilagođen njihovim potrebama. Banka je to bila voljna platiti, ali nije joj bilo dozvoljeno&mdash;izvorni kod bio je tajan. Tako joj je bilo potrebno šest mjeseci nepotrebnog rada, rada koji se ubraja u BDP no zapravo je uzaludan.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: The <abbr title="Massachusetts Institute of Technology">MIT</abbr> Artificial Intelligence Lab (AI Lab) received a graphics printer as a gift from Xerox around 1977.  It was run by free software to which we added many convenient features.  For example, the software would notify a user immediately on completion of a print job.  Whenever the printer had trouble, such as a paper jam or running out of paper, the software would immediately notify all users who had print jobs queued. These features facilitated smooth operation.
hr: Xerox je oko 1977. godine laboratoriju za umjetnu inteligenciju (AI Lab) <abbr title="Massachusetts Institute of Technology">MIT</abbr>-a poklonio grafički pisač. Pokretao ga je slobodan softver kojem smo dodali mnogo zgodnih mogućnosti. Na primjer, softver bi odmah po završetku ispisa obavijestio korisnika o tome. Svaki put kada je pisač imao neki problem, kao što je zastoj papira ili potrošen sav papir, softver bi odmah obavijestio sve korisnike čiji ispis je bio na čekanju. Ove su odlike olakšavale rad bez zastoja.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Later Xerox gave the AI Lab a newer, faster printer, one of the first laser printers.  It was driven by proprietary software that ran in a separate dedicated computer, so we couldn't add any of our favorite features.  We could arrange to send a notification when a print job was sent to the dedicated computer, but not when the job was actually printed (and the delay was usually considerable).  There was no way to find out when the job was actually printed; you could only guess.  And no one was informed when there was a paper jam, so the printer often went for an hour without being fixed.
hr: Kasnije je Xerox dao AI Labu noviji, brži pisač, jedan od prvih laserskih pisača. Pogonio ga je vlasnički softver koji je radio na odvojenom namjenskom računalu, tako da nismo mogli dodati ni jednu od naših omiljenih mogućnosti. Mogli smo urediti da se šalje obavijest o slanju ispisa na namjensko računalo, ali ne i obavijest kada je ispis završen (a vremenski razmak između tih dviju radnji bio je značajan). Nije postojao način na koji bismo mogli doznati kada je ispis zapravo dovršen, mogli smo samo pretpostavljati. Isto tako nitko nije bio obaviješten o zastoju papira, tako da je često prolazio i sat vremena prije nego je problem bio otklonjen.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: The system programmers at the AI Lab were capable of fixing such problems, probably as capable as the original authors of the program.  Xerox was uninterested in fixing them, and chose to prevent us, so we were forced to accept the problems.  They were never fixed.
hr: Programeri sustava u AI Labu bili su sposobni takve probleme otkloniti, vjerojatno jednako sposobni kao i sami autori tog programa. Xerox nije bio zainteresiran za njihovo otklanjanje, a odabrali su da i nas spriječe u tome, tako da smo bili prisiljeni prihvatiti te probleme, koji nikada nisu bili riješeni.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Most good programmers have experienced this frustration.  The bank could afford to solve the problem by writing a new program from scratch, but a typical user, no matter how skilled, can only give up.
hr: Većina dobrih programera iskusila je ovu frustraciju. Banka si je mogla priuštiti pisanje novog programa od početka, no tipičan korisnik, bez obzira koliko vješt bio, može samo odustati od toga.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Giving up causes psychosocial harm&mdash;to the spirit of self-reliance.  It is demoralizing to live in a house that you cannot rearrange to suit your needs.  It leads to resignation and discouragement, which can spread to affect other aspects of one's life.  People who feel this way are unhappy and do not do good work.
hr: Odustajanje uzrokuje psihosocijalnu štetu&mdash;duhu samopouzdanja. Demoralizirajuće je živjeti u kući koju ne možete preurediti kako bi odgovarala vašim potrebama. To dovodi do rezignacije i obeshrabrenja, koje se može proširiti i utjecati na druge aspekte nečijeg života. Ljudi koji se ovako osjećaju nesretni su i ne rade dobro.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Imagine what it would be like if recipes were hoarded in the same fashion as software.  You might say, &ldquo;How do I change this recipe to take out the salt?&rdquo; and the great chef would respond, &ldquo;How dare you insult my recipe, the child of my brain and my palate, by trying to tamper with it? You don't have the judgment to change my recipe and make it work right!&rdquo;
hr: Zamislite kako bi bilo da se receptima škrtari na način na koji se to čini sa softverom. Mogli biste reći &ldquo;Kako da promijenim ovaj recept kako bih izbacio sol?&rdquo;, a glavni kuhar bi odgovorio &ldquo;Kako se usuđujete vrijeđati moj recept, plod mojeg uma i nepca, pokušavajući petljati po njemu? Nemate dovoljno znanja da izmijenite moj recept, a da on nakon toga bude ispravan!&rdquo;

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: &ldquo;But my doctor says I'm not supposed to eat salt! What can I do? Will you take out the salt for me?&rdquo;
hr: &ldquo;Ali moj liječnik kaže da ne smijem jesti sol! Što da učinim? Hoćete li mi vi ukloniti sol?&rdquo;

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: &ldquo;I would be glad to do that; my fee is only $50,000.&rdquo; Since the owner has a monopoly on changes, the fee tends to be large.  &ldquo;However, right now I don't have time.  I am busy with a commission to design a new recipe for ship's biscuit for the Navy Department.  I might get around to you in about two years.&rdquo;
hr: &ldquo;Rado bih to učinio; moja naknada je samo 50&nbsp;000 dolara.&rdquo; Budući da vlasnik ima monopol na izmjene, naknada ima tendenciju biti visoka. &ldquo;Međutim, trenutno nemam vremena. Zauzet sam narudžbom da osmislim novi recept za brodski kolač za Ministarstvo pomorstva. Bit ću u mogućnosti posvetiti vam se za približno dvije godine.&rdquo;

note: type: Content of: <div><h4>
en: Obstructing Software Development
hr: Opstruiranje razvoja softvera

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: The third level of material harm affects software development.  Software development used to be an evolutionary process, where a person would take an existing program and rewrite parts of it for one new feature, and then another person would rewrite parts to add another feature; in some cases, this continued over a period of twenty years.  Meanwhile, parts of the program would be &ldquo;cannibalized&rdquo; to form the beginnings of other programs.
hr: Treća razina materijalne štete pogađa razvoj softvera. Razvoj softvera je bio evolucijski proces, gdje bi neka osoba uzela neki postojeći program i ponovno napisala neke njegove dijelove za jedan mogući ishod, zatim bi druga osoba ponovno napisala neke dijelove kako bi dodala drugi mogući ishod; u nekim slučajevima, to bi se nastavljalo kroz vremenski period od dvadeset godina. U međuvremenu, dijelovi programa bili bi &ldquo;kanibalizirani&rdquo; kako bi činili početak nekih drugih programa.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: The existence of owners prevents this kind of evolution, making it necessary to start from scratch when developing a program.  It also prevents new practitioners from studying existing programs to learn useful techniques or even how large programs can be structured.
hr: Postojanje vlasnika sprečava ovakvu evoluciju, čineći nužnim počinjanje ispočetka kada se razvija neki program. Ono također sprečava nove vježbenike u proučavanju postojećih programa kako bi naučili korisne tehnike ili čak i način na koji se veliki programi mogu izgrađivati.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Owners also obstruct education.  I have met bright students in computer science who have never seen the source code of a large program.  They may be good at writing small programs, but they can't begin to learn the different skills of writing large ones if they can't see how others have done it.
hr: Vlasnici isto tako ometaju obrazovanje. Sreo sam sjajne studente računalnih znanosti koji nikada nisu vidjeli izvorni kod nekog velikog programa. Mogu biti dobri u pisanju malih programa, ali ne mogu početi učiti različite vještine pisana velikih programa ako ne mogu vidjeti kako su to učinili drugi.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: In any intellectual field, one can reach greater heights by standing on the shoulders of others.  But that is no longer generally allowed in the software field&mdash;you can only stand on the shoulders of the other people <em>in your own company</em>.
hr: U bilo kojem intelektualnom području, čovjek može doseći veće visine stojeći na ramenima drugih. No to uglavnom više nije dozvoljeno u području softvera&mdash;možete stajati samo na ramenima drugih ljudi <em>iz vaše tvrtke</em>.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: The associated psychosocial harm affects the spirit of scientific cooperation, which used to be so strong that scientists would cooperate even when their countries were at war.  In this spirit, Japanese oceanographers abandoning their lab on an island in the Pacific carefully preserved their work for the invading U.S. Marines, and left a note asking them to take good care of it.
hr: Pridružena psihosocijalna šteta utječe na duh znanstvene suradnje, koji je običavao biti toliko jak da bi znanstvenici surađivali čak i kada su njihove zemlje bile u ratu. U tom duhu, japanski oceanografi koji su napustili svoj laboratorij na jednom otoku u Pacifiku pažljivo su sačuvali svoj rad za osvajačke marince Sjedinjenih Država i ostavili im poruku da se dobro pobrinu za njega.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Conflict for profit has destroyed what international conflict spared.  Nowadays scientists in many fields don't publish enough in their papers to enable others to replicate the experiment.  They publish only enough to let readers marvel at how much they were able to do.  This is certainly true in computer science, where the source code for the programs reported on is usually secret.
hr: Sukob za profit razorio je ono što je međunarodni sukob poštedio. Danas znanstvenici iz mnogih područja ne objavljuju u svojim člancima dovoljno da bi omogućili drugima da ponove pokus. Objavljuju samo toliko koliko je dovoljno da omogući čitateljima da se dive koliko su ovi uspjeli napraviti. Ovo je svakako istina u računalnoj znanosti, gdje je izvorni kod programa o kojem se izvještava uglavnom tajan.

note: type: Content of: <div><h4>
en: It Does Not Matter How Sharing Is Restricted
hr: Nije važno kako je dijeljenje ograničeno

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: I have been discussing the effects of preventing people from copying, changing, and building on a program.  I have not specified how this obstruction is carried out, because that doesn't affect the conclusion.  Whether it is done by copy protection, or copyright, or licenses, or encryption, or <abbr title="Read-only Memory">ROM</abbr> cards, or hardware serial numbers, if it <em>succeeds</em> in preventing use, it does harm.
hr: Raspravljao sam o učincima sprečavanja ljudi da kopiraju, mijenjaju i dorađuju program. Nisam odredio kako se to ometanje provodi, jer to ne utječe na zaključak. Bilo da se to radi zaštitom od kopiranja, autorskim pravima, licencama, šifriranjem, <abbr title="Read-only Memory">ROM</abbr> karticama ili hardverskim serijskim brojevima, ako <em>uspije</em> spriječiti korištenje, nanosi štetu.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Users do consider some of these methods more obnoxious than others.  I suggest that the methods most hated are those that accomplish their objective.
hr: Korisnici smatraju neke od ovih metoda odvratnijima od drugih. Predlažem da su najmrskije one metode koje postižu svoj cilj.

note: type: Content of: <div><h4>
en: Software Should be Free
hr: Softver treba biti slobodan

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: I have shown how ownership of a program&mdash;the power to restrict changing or copying it&mdash;is obstructive.  Its negative effects are widespread and important.  It follows that society shouldn't have owners for programs.
hr: Pokazao sam kako je vlasništvo nad programom&mdash;moć ograničavanja njegovog mijenjanja ili kopiranja&mdash;ometajuće. Njegovi negativni učinci široko su rasprostranjeni i važni. Iz toga slijedi da društvo ne bi smjelo imati vlasnike programa.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Another way to understand this is that what society needs is free software, and proprietary software is a poor substitute.  Encouraging the substitute is not a rational way to get what we need.
hr: Drugi način da se ovo shvati je da je slobodan softver ono što je društvu potrebno, dok je vlasnički softver slab nadomjestak za to. Poticanje tog nadomjestka nije racionalan način dobivanja onoga što nam je potrebno.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Vaclav Havel has advised us to &ldquo;Work for something because it is good, not just because it stands a chance to succeed.&rdquo; A business making proprietary software stands a chance of success in its own narrow terms, but it is not what is good for society.
hr: Vaclav Havel nas je savjetovao da &ldquo;radimo za nešto zato što je to dobro, a ne samo zato što ima izgleda uspjeti.&rdquo; Tvrtka koja proizvodi vlasnički softver ima izgleda uspjeti u svojim uskim uvjetima, no to nije nešto što je dobro za društvo.

note: type: Content of: <div><h3>
en: Why People Will Develop Software
hr: Zašto će ljudi razvijati softver

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: If we eliminate copyright as a means of encouraging people to develop software, at first less software will be developed, but that software will be more useful.  It is not clear whether the overall delivered user satisfaction will be less; but if it is, or if we wish to increase it anyway, there are other ways to encourage development, just as there are ways besides toll booths to raise money for streets. Before I talk about how that can be done, first I want to question how much artificial encouragement is truly necessary.
hr: Ako uklonimo autorska prava kao način poticanja ljudi da razvijaju softver, isprva će se razvijati manje softvera, ali će taj softver biti korisniji. Nije jasno hoće li ukupno zadovoljstvo korisnika biti manje; no ako bude, ili ako ga budemo željeli povećati, postoje i drugi načini poticanja razvoja, jednako kao što postoje i drugi načini osim naplatnih kućica na koje se može prikupiti novac za ceste. Prije nego što počnem govoriti o tome kako se to može učiniti, želim provjeriti koliko je umjetnog poticaja istinski potrebno.

note: type: Content of: <div><h4>
en: Programming is Fun
hr: Programiranje je zabavno

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: There are some lines of work that few will enter except for money; road construction, for example.  There are other fields of study and art in which there is little chance to become rich, which people enter for their fascination or their perceived value to society.  Examples include mathematical logic, classical music, and archaeology; and political organizing among working people.  People compete, more sadly than bitterly, for the few funded positions available, none of which is funded very well.  They may even pay for the chance to work in the field, if they can afford to.
hr: Postoje neka zanimanja za koje će se rijetki opredijeliti, osim zbog novca; na primjer, izgradnja cesta. Postoje druga područja istraživanja i umjetnosti u kojima nema velike mogućnosti da se postane bogat, za koje se ljudi opredjeljuju zbog svojeg zanosa ili njihove vrijednosti za društvo. Primjeri uključuju matematičku logiku, klasičnu glazbu i arheologiju, te političko organiziranje među radnicima. Ljudi se natječu, više tužno nego žestoko, za tih nekoliko dostupnih plaćenih namještenja, od kojih nijedno nije naročito dobro plaćeno. Postoji mogućnost da čak i plate za priliku da rade u određenom području, ako si to mogu priuštiti.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Such a field can transform itself overnight if it begins to offer the possibility of getting rich.  When one worker gets rich, others demand the same opportunity.  Soon all may demand large sums of money for doing what they used to do for pleasure.  When another couple of years go by, everyone connected with the field will deride the idea that work would be done in the field without large financial returns.  They will advise social planners to ensure that these returns are possible, prescribing special privileges, powers, and monopolies as necessary to do so.
hr: Takvo se područje može preko noći preobraziti ako počne nuditi mogućnost bogaćenja. Kada se jedan radnik obogati, ostali zahtijevaju istu priliku. Uskoro svi mogu zahtijevati veliku količinu novca da bi radili ono što su do tada radili iz zadovoljstva. Nakon nekoliko godina, svatko povezan s tim područjem rada s podsmijehom će gledati na pomisao da u tom području nešto radi bez velike financijske koristi. Savjetovat će društvene planere da osiguraju takvu financijsku korist, propisujući posebne povlastice, moći i monopol koji su potrebni za to.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: This change happened in the field of computer programming in the 1980s.  In the 1970s, there were articles on &ldquo;computer addiction&rdquo;: users were &ldquo;onlining&rdquo; and had hundred-dollar-a-week habits.  It was generally understood that people frequently loved programming enough to break up their marriages.  Today, it is generally understood that no one would program except for a high rate of pay. People have forgotten what they knew back then.
hr: Ova se promjena dogodila u području računalnog programiranja osamdesetih godina dvadesetog stoljeća. U sedamdesetim godinama su se pojavili članci o &ldquo;računalnom ovisništvu&rdquo;: korisnici su bili &ldquo;online&rdquo; i trošili na to velik novac. Općenito se smatralo da ljudi često vole programiranje dovoljno snažno da unište svoj brak. Danas se općenito smatra da nitko ne bi želio programirati, osim za veliku plaću. Ljudi su zaboravili ono što su prije znali.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: When it is true at a given time that most people will work in a certain field only for high pay, it need not remain true.  The dynamic of change can run in reverse, if society provides an impetus.  If we take away the possibility of great wealth, then after a while, when the people have readjusted their attitudes, they will once again be eager to work in the field for the joy of accomplishment.
hr: Ako je u nekom trenutku istina da će većina ljudi raditi u određenom području jedino za visoku plaću, ne mora tako i ostati. Dinamika promjene može ići i unatrag, ako društvo osigura poticaj. Ako uklonimo mogućnost velikog bogatstva, tada će nakon nekog vremena, kada ljudi prilagode svoje stavove, ponovno biti željni rada u tom području radi zadovoljstva zbog postignuća.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: The question &ldquo;How can we pay programmers?&rdquo; becomes an easier question when we realize that it's not a matter of paying them a fortune.  A mere living is easier to raise.
hr: Pitanje &ldquo;Kako da platimo programere?&rdquo; postaje lakše kada shvatimo da se ne radi o tome da im platimo cijelo bogatstvo. Lakše je jednostavno osigurati im dobar život.

note: type: Content of: <div><h4>
en: Funding Free Software
hr: Financiranje slobodnog softvera

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Institutions that pay programmers do not have to be software houses.  Many other institutions already exist that can do this.
hr: Ustanove koje plaćaju programere ne moraju biti softverske kuće. Mnoge druge ustanove koje to mogu raditi već postoje.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Hardware manufacturers find it essential to support software development even if they cannot control the use of the software.  In 1970, much of their software was free because they did not consider restricting it. Today, their increasing willingness to join consortiums shows their realization that owning the software is not what is really important for them.
hr: Za proizvođače hardvera je bitno da podržavaju razvoj softvera čak i ako ne mogu kontrolirati korištenje softvera. Godine 1970. mnogo je njihovog softvera bilo slobodno jer nisu razmatrali njegovo ograničavanje. Danas svojom sklonošću pridruživanja konzorcijima pokazuju svoje shvaćanje da posjedovanje softvera nije nešto što im je uistinu važno.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Universities conduct many programming projects.  Today they often sell the results, but in the 1970s they did not.  Is there any doubt that universities would develop free software if they were not allowed to sell software? These projects could be supported by the same government contracts and grants that now support proprietary software development.
hr: Sveučilišta provode mnoge softverske projekte. Danas često prodaju svoje rezultate, ali 1970. to nisu činili. Postoji li ikakva sumnja u to da bi sveučilišta razvijala slobodan softver ako im ne bi bilo dopušteno prodavati softver? Ove bi se projekte moglo podržavati istim vladinim ugovorima i stipendijama kojima se sada podržava razvoj vlasničkog softvera.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: It is common today for university researchers to get grants to develop a system, develop it nearly to the point of completion and call that &ldquo;finished,&rdquo; and then start companies where they really finish the project and make it usable.  Sometimes they declare the unfinished version &ldquo;free&rdquo;; if they are thoroughly corrupt, they instead get an exclusive license from the university.  This is not a secret; it is openly admitted by everyone concerned.  Yet if the researchers were not exposed to the temptation to do these things, they would still do their research.
hr: Danas je uobičajeno da sveučilišni istraživači dobiju stipendije za razvoj sustava, razviju ga gotovo do kraja i nazovu ga &ldquo;dovršenim&rdquo;, a zatim osnuju tvrtke gdje zaista dovrše projekt i učine ga upotrebljivim. Ponekad nedovršenu verziju proglase &ldquo;slobodnom&rdquo;; ako su pokvareni do srži, umjesto toga od sveučilišta zatraže ekskluzivnu licencu. To nije tajna: otvoreno je priznaju svi kojih se tiče. No kada istraživači ne bi bili izloženi iskušenju da čine ove stvari, ipak bi i dalje radili svoja istraživanja.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Programmers writing free software can make their living by selling services related to the software.  I have been hired to port the <a href="/software/gcc/">GNU C compiler</a> to new hardware, and to make user-interface extensions to <a href="/software/emacs/">GNU Emacs</a>.  (I offer these improvements to the public once they are done.)  I also teach classes for which I am paid.
hr: Programeri koji pišu slobodan softver mogu za život zarađivati prodajom usluga povezanih s tim softverom. Bio sam plaćen da prenesem <a href="/software/gcc/">GNU-ov prevodilac za jezik C</a> na novi hardver i da izradim dodatke korisničkog sučelja za <a href="/software/emacs/">GNU-ov Emacs</a>. (Ta poboljšanja, kada su gotova, nudim javnosti.) Također držim i predavanja za koja sam plaćen.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: I am not alone in working this way; there is now a successful, growing corporation which does no other kind of work.  Several other companies also provide commercial support for the free software of the GNU system. This is the beginning of the independent software support industry&mdash;an industry that could become quite large if free software becomes prevalent.  It provides users with an option generally unavailable for proprietary software, except to the very wealthy.
hr: Nisam sam u ovome načinu rada, sada postoji uspješna, rastuća korporacija koja ne radi nikakvu drugu vrstu posla. Više drugih tvrtki isto tako pružaju komercijalnu podršku za slobodan softver sustava GNU. To je začetak gospodarske grane za neovisnu softversku podršku&mdash;gospodarske grane koja bi mogla postati prilično velika ukoliko slobodan softver postane dominantan. To korisnicima pruža mogućnost koja, osim za one vrlo bogate, uglavnom nije dostupna kod vlasničkog softvera.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: New institutions such as the <a href="/fsf/fsf.html">Free Software Foundation</a> can also fund programmers.  Most of the Foundation's funds come from users buying tapes through the mail.  The software on the tapes is free, which means that every user has the freedom to copy it and change it, but many nonetheless pay to get copies.  (Recall that &ldquo;free software&rdquo; refers to freedom, not to price.)  Some users who already have a copy order tapes as a way of making a contribution they feel we deserve.  The Foundation also receives sizable donations from computer manufacturers.
hr: Nove ustanove kao što je <a href="/fsf/fsf.html">Zaklada za slobodan softver</a> također mogu financirati programere. Većina novčanih sredstava Zaklade dolazi od korisnika koji poštom kupuju magnetske trake. Softver na trakama je slobodan, što znači da svaki korisnik ima slobodu kopirati ga i mijenjati, no svejedno mnogi plaćaju da bi dobili kopije. (Prisjetite se da se &ldquo;slobodan softver&rdquo; odnosi na slobodu, ne na cijenu.) Neki korisnici koji već imaju kopiju naručuju trake kao način davanja priloga za kojeg misle da ga zaslužujemo. Zaklada isto tako prima i značajne donacije od proizvođača računala.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: The Free Software Foundation is a charity, and its income is spent on hiring as many programmers as possible.  If it had been set up as a business, distributing the same free software to the public for the same fee, it would now provide a very good living for its founder.
hr: Zaklada za slobodan softver je neprofitna i njezin prihod troši se na zapošljavanje što je moguće više programera. Da je postavljena kao poduzeće, koje distribuira javnosti isti slobodan softver za istu naknadu, sada bi svojem osnivaču osiguravala vrlo dobre prihode.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Because the Foundation is a charity, programmers often work for the Foundation for half of what they could make elsewhere.  They do this because we are free of bureaucracy, and because they feel satisfaction in knowing that their work will not be obstructed from use.  Most of all, they do it because programming is fun.  In addition, volunteers have written many useful programs for us.  (Even technical writers have begun to volunteer.)
hr: Zato što je Zaklada osnovana kao neprofitna, programeri često rade za Zakladu u pola cijene koju bi mogli postići drugdje. Čine to zbog toga što nemamo birokraciju, a i zbog toga što osjećaju zadovoljstvo znajući da korištenje njihovog rada neće biti ometano. Najviše od svega, čine to zato što je programiranje zabavno. Dodatno, volonteri su za nas napisali mnogo korisnih programa. (Čak su i pisci tehničke dokumentacije počeli volontirati.)

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: This confirms that programming is among the most fascinating of all fields, along with music and art.  We don't have to fear that no one will want to program.
hr: Ovo potvrđuje da je područje programiranja najviše očaravajuće od svih područja, zajedno s glazbom i umjetnošću. Ne moramo se plašiti da nitko neće htjeti programirati.

note: type: Content of: <div><h4>
en: What Do Users Owe to Developers?
hr: Što korisnici duguju razvijateljima?

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: There is a good reason for users of software to feel a moral obligation to contribute to its support.  Developers of free software are contributing to the users' activities, and it is both fair and in the long-term interest of the users to give them funds to continue.
hr: Postoji dobar razlog da korisnici softvera osjećaju moralnu obavezu doprinijeti njegovom razvoju. Razvijatelji slobodnog softvera doprinose radu korisnika, tako da je i pošteno i u dugoročnom interesu korisnika financirati ih kako bi nastavili.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: However, this does not apply to proprietary software developers, since obstructionism deserves a punishment rather than a reward.
hr: Međutim, ovo se ne odnosi na razvijatelje vlasničkog softvera, budući da opstruktivnost zaslužuje kaznu, a ne nagradu.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: We thus have a paradox: the developer of useful software is entitled to the support of the users, but any attempt to turn this moral obligation into a requirement destroys the basis for the obligation.  A developer can either deserve a reward or demand it, but not both.
hr: Stoga imamo paradoks: razvijatelj slobodnog softvera ima pravo na podršku korisnika, no bilo kakav pokušaj da se ova moralna dužnost pretvori u uvjet razara temelje za ovu dužnost. Razvijatelj može ili zaslužiti nagradu ili je zahtijevati, ali ne može oboje.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: I believe that an ethical developer faced with this paradox must act so as to deserve the reward, but should also entreat the users for voluntary donations.  Eventually the users will learn to support developers without coercion, just as they have learned to support public radio and television stations.
hr: Vjerujem da etički razvijatelj suočen s ovim paradoksom mora djelovati tako da zasluži nagradu, no trebao bi i moliti korisnike za dobrovoljne donacije. Na kraju će korisnici naučiti podržavati razvijatelje bez prisile, jednako kako su naučili podržavati javne radio i televizijske postaje.

note: type: Content of: <div><h3>
en: What Is Software Productivity?
hr: Što je softverska učinkovitost?

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: If software were free, there would still be programmers, but perhaps fewer of them.  Would this be bad for society?
hr: Kada bi softver bio slobodan, i dalje bismo imali programere, no možda bi ih bilo manje. Bi li to bilo loše za društvo?

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Not necessarily.  Today the advanced nations have fewer farmers than in 1900, but we do not think this is bad for society, because the few deliver more food to the consumers than the many used to do.  We call this improved productivity.  Free software would require far fewer programmers to satisfy the demand, because of increased software productivity at all levels:
hr: Ne nužno. Danas napredne države imaju manje poljoprivrednika nego 1900. godine, no ne mislimo da je to loše za društvo, zato jer manje njih proizvodi više hrane za potrošače nego što je prije činilo njih više. To nazivamo poboljšanom učinkovitošću. Slobodan softver bi zahtijevao daleko manje programera da bi se zadovoljila potreba, zbog povećane softverske učinkovitosti na svim razinama:

note: type: Content of: <div><ul><li>
en: Wider use of each program that is developed.
hr: Šira upotreba svakog razvijenog programa.

note: type: Content of: <div><ul><li>
en: The ability to adapt existing programs for customization instead of starting from scratch.
hr: Mogućnost prilagođavanja postojećih programa umjesto započinjanja ispočetka.

note: type: Content of: <div><ul><li>
en: Better education of programmers.
hr: Bolje obrazovanje programera.

note: type: Content of: <div><ul><li>
en: The elimination of duplicate development effort.
hr: Uklanjanje podvostručenog truda prilikom razvijanja.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Those who object to cooperation claiming it would result in the employment of fewer programmers are actually objecting to increased productivity.  Yet these people usually accept the widely held belief that the software industry needs increased productivity.  How is this?
hr: Oni koji prigovaraju suradnji tvrdeći da bi rezultirala zapošljavanjem manje programera zapravo prigovaraju povećanoj učinkovitosti. Usprkos tome, ti ljudi uglavnom prihvaćaju široko rasprostranjeno uvjerenje da je softverskoj industriji potrebna veća učinkovitost. Kako to?

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: &ldquo;Software productivity&rdquo; can mean two different things: the overall productivity of all software development, or the productivity of individual projects.  Overall productivity is what society would like to improve, and the most straightforward way to do this is to eliminate the artificial obstacles to cooperation which reduce it.  But researchers who study the field of &ldquo;software productivity&rdquo; focus only on the second, limited, sense of the term, where improvement requires difficult technological advances.
hr: &ldquo;Softverska učinkovitost&rdquo; može značiti dvije različite stvari: ukupnu učinkovitost cjelokupnog softverskog razvoja, ili učinkovitost pojedinačnih projekata. Ukupna učinkovitost je ono što bi društvo željelo da se poveća, a najizravniji način da se to učini je da se uklone umjetne prepreke suradnji koje smanjuju tu učinkovitost. No, istraživači koji proučavaju područje &ldquo;softverske učinkovitosti&rdquo; usredotočuju se samo na ovaj drugi, ograničeni, smisao tog izraza, gdje poboljšanje zahtijeva težak tehnički napredak.

note: type: Content of: <div><h3>
en: Is Competition Inevitable?
hr: Je li konkurencija neizbježna?

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Is it inevitable that people will try to compete, to surpass their rivals in society? Perhaps it is.  But competition itself is not harmful; the harmful thing is <em>combat</em>.
hr: Je li neizbježno da se ljudi pokušavaju natjecati, nadmašiti svoje suparnike u društvu? Možda jest. No konkurencija sama po sebi nije štetna, štetna stvar je <em>borba</em>.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: There are many ways to compete.  Competition can consist of trying to achieve ever more, to outdo what others have done.  For example, in the old days, there was competition among programming wizards&mdash;competition for who could make the computer do the most amazing thing, or for who could make the shortest or fastest program for a given task.  This kind of competition can benefit everyone, <em>as long as</em> the spirit of good sportsmanship is maintained.
hr: Postoji mnogo načina na koje se moguće natjecati. Natjecanje se može sastojati od pokušaja da uvijek postignemo više, da nadmašimo ono što su drugi učinili. Na primjer, nekada, natjecanje se odvijalo među programerskim čarobnjacima&mdash;natjecanje u tome tko može natjerati računalo da napravi najnevjerojatniju stvar ili u tome tko može napraviti najkraći ili najbrži program za određeni zadatak. Ovakva vrsta natjecanja donosi dobrobit svakome, <em>tako dugo dok</em> se održava fer sportski duh.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Constructive competition is enough competition to motivate people to great efforts.  A number of people are competing to be the first to have visited all the countries on Earth; some even spend fortunes trying to do this.  But they do not bribe ship captains to strand their rivals on desert islands.  They are content to let the best person win.
hr: Konstruktivno natjecanje je dovoljno da bi motiviralo ljude za velike napore. Mnogi ljudi natječu se kako bi bili prvi koji su posjetili sve zemlje svijeta, neki čak troše bogatstvo pokušavajući to učiniti. No, ne podmićuju kapetane brodova da nasuču svoje rivale na puste otoke. Zadovoljni su time da najbolji pobijedi.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Competition becomes combat when the competitors begin trying to impede each other instead of advancing themselves&mdash;when &ldquo;Let the best person win&rdquo; gives way to &ldquo;Let me win, best or not.&rdquo; Proprietary software is harmful, not because it is a form of competition, but because it is a form of combat among the citizens of our society.
hr: Natjecanje postaje borba kada natjecatelji počnu pokušavati ometati jedni druge umjesto da sami napreduju&mdash;kada izraz &ldquo;Neka najbolji pobijedi&rdquo; ustupi mjesto izrazu &ldquo;Hoću pobijediti, bio najbolji ili ne.&rdquo; Vlasnički softver štetan je, ne zato što je to oblik natjecanja, nego zato što je to oblik borbe među građanima našeg društva.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Competition in business is not necessarily combat.  For example, when two grocery stores compete, their entire effort is to improve their own operations, not to sabotage the rival.  But this does not demonstrate a special commitment to business ethics; rather, there is little scope for combat in this line of business short of physical violence.  Not all areas of business share this characteristic.  Withholding information that could help everyone advance is a form of combat.
hr: Natjecanje u poslu nije nužno borba. Na primjer, kada se trgovine mješovitom robom natječu, sav njihov napor usmjeren je na poboljšavanje vlastitog djelovanja, ne na sabotažu suparnika. No, ovo nije iskazivanje posebne posvećenosti poslovnoj etici, prije je to zato što je, osim fizičkog nasilja, malo prostora za borbu u toj vrsti posla.Ne dijele sva poslovna područja ovu osobinu. Zadržavanje informacije koja bi mogla svima pomoći da napreduju oblik je borbe.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Business ideology does not prepare people to resist the temptation to combat the competition.  Some forms of combat have been banned with antitrust laws, truth in advertising laws, and so on, but rather than generalizing this to a principled rejection of combat in general, executives invent other forms of combat which are not specifically prohibited.  Society's resources are squandered on the economic equivalent of factional civil war.
hr: Poslovna ideologija ne priprema ljude da se odupru iskušenju borbe s konkurencijom. Neke vrste borbe izbačene su antitrustovskim zakonima, istinom u zakonima o oglašavanju i slično, ali umjesto da to uopće u načelno odbacivanje borbe općenito, direktori su izmislili druge oblike borbe koji nisu posebno zabranjeni. Resursi društva rasipaju se u ekonomskom ekvivalentu frakcijskog građanskog rata.

note: type: Content of: <div><h3>
en: &ldquo;Why Don't You Move to Russia?&rdquo;
hr: &ldquo;Zašto se ne preseliš u Rusiju?&rdquo;

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: In the United States, any advocate of other than the most extreme form of laissez-faire selfishness has often heard this accusation.  For example, it is leveled against the supporters of a national health care system, such as is found in all the other industrialized nations of the free world.  It is leveled against the advocates of public support for the arts, also universal in advanced nations.  The idea that citizens have any obligation to the public good is identified in America with Communism.  But how similar are these ideas?
hr: U Sjedinjenim Državama, svaki zagovornik bilo čega osim krajnjeg oblika laissez-faire sebičnosti često je čuo ovakvu optužbu. Na primjer, uperena je protiv onih koji podržavaju nacionalni sustav zdravstvene skrbi, kakav postoji u svim drugim industrijaliziranim narodima svijeta. Uperena je protiv javne podrške umjetnosti, također zajedničke svim naprednim narodima. Pomisao da građani imaju bilo kakvu dužnost prema javnom dobru u Americi je izjednačena s komunizmom. No, koliko su te ideje zaista slične?

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Communism as was practiced in the Soviet Union was a system of central control where all activity was regimented, supposedly for the common good, but actually for the sake of the members of the Communist party. And where copying equipment was closely guarded to prevent illegal copying.
hr: Komunizam kakav je primjenjivao Sovjetski savez bio je sustav središnje kontrole gdje je sva djelatnost bila jednoobrazna, navodno za opće dobro, no zapravo uime članova Komunističke partije. Isto tako je oprema za kopiranje bila strogo čuvana kako bi se spriječilo ilegalno kopiranje.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: The American system of software copyright exercises central control over distribution of a program, and guards copying equipment with automatic copying-protection schemes to prevent illegal copying.
hr: Američki sustav softverskih autorskih prava primjenjuje središnju kontrolu nad distribucijom programa i čuva opremu za kopiranje automatskim sustavima zaštite od kopiranja kako bi spriječio ilegalno kopiranje.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: By contrast, I am working to build a system where people are free to decide their own actions; in particular, free to help their neighbors, and free to alter and improve the tools which they use in their daily lives.  A system based on voluntary cooperation and on decentralization.
hr: Suprotno tome, ja radim na tome da izgradim sustav u kojem su ljudi slobodni odlučiti o svojim djelovanjima, a naročito, slobodni pomoći svojim susjedima i slobodni izmijeniti i poboljšati alate koje koriste u svakodnevnom životu. Sustav temeljen na dobrovoljnoj suradnji i na decentralizaciji.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Thus, if we are to judge views by their resemblance to Russian Communism, it is the software owners who are the Communists.
hr: Dakle, ako ćemo suditi gledišta po njihovim sličnostima ruskom komunizmu, vlasnici softvera su ti koji su komunisti.

note: type: Content of: <div><h3>
en: The Question of Premises
hr: Pitanje pretpostavki

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: I make the assumption in this paper that a user of software is no less important than an author, or even an author's employer.  In other words, their interests and needs have equal weight, when we decide which course of action is best.
hr: U ovom dokumentu krećem od pretpostavke da korisnik softvera nije manje važan od autora, ili čak autorovog poslodavca. Drugim riječima, njihovi interesi i potrebe imaju jednaku težinu, kada odlučujemo koji je pravac djelovanja najbolji.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: This premise is not universally accepted.  Many maintain that an author's employer is fundamentally more important than anyone else.  They say, for example, that the purpose of having owners of software is to give the author's employer the advantage he deserves&mdash;regardless of how this may affect the public.
hr: Ova pretpostavka nije općeprihvaćena. Mnogi se drže toga da je autorov poslodavac bitno važniji od bilo koga drugog. Kažu, na primjer, da je smisao vlasništva nad softverom davanje autorovom poslodavcu prednosti koju zaslužuje&mdash;bez obzira na to kako to može utjecati na javnost.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: It is no use trying to prove or disprove these premises.  Proof requires shared premises.  So most of what I have to say is addressed only to those who share the premises I use, or at least are interested in what their consequences are.  For those who believe that the owners are more important than everyone else, this paper is simply irrelevant.
hr: Nema koristi od pokušaja dokazivanja ili pobijanja ovih pretpostavki. Dokaz zahtijeva dijeljene pretpostavke. Stoga je većina onoga što imam za reći namijenjeno samo onima koji dijele moje pretpostavke, ili ih barem zanima koje su njihove posljedice. Za one koji vjeruju da su vlasnici važniji od svih drugih, ovaj dokument je jednostavno beznačajan.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: But why would a large number of Americans accept a premise that elevates certain people in importance above everyone else? Partly because of the belief that this premise is part of the legal traditions of American society.  Some people feel that doubting the premise means challenging the basis of society.
hr: No, zašto bi veliki broj Amerikanaca prihvatio pretpostavku kojom se određeni ljudi po važnosti izdižu iznad svih drugih? Djelomično zbog uvjerenja da je ova pretpostavka dio pravne tradicije američkog društva. Neki ljudi misle da dovođenje te pretpostavke u pitanje znači izazov temeljima društva.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: It is important for these people to know that this premise is not part of our legal tradition.  It never has been.
hr: Važno je da ti ljudi shvate da ove pretpostavke nisu dio naše pravne tradicije. Nikada nisu niti bile.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Thus, the Constitution says that the purpose of copyright is to &ldquo;promote the Progress of Science and the useful Arts.&rdquo; The Supreme Court has elaborated on this, stating in <em>Fox Film v. Doyal</em> that &ldquo;The sole interest of the United States and the primary object in conferring the [copyright] monopoly lie in the general benefits derived by the public from the labors of authors.&rdquo;
hr: Dakle, Ustav kaže da je smisao autorskih prava &ldquo;promicati napredak znanosti i korisnih umjetnosti.&rdquo; Vrhovni sud pojasnio je to, izjavljujući u slučaju <em>Fox Filma protiv Doyala</em> da &ldquo;jedini interes Sjedinjenih Država i prvenstveni cilj dodjeljivanja monopola [autorskih prava] leži u općim dobrobitima koje javnost dobiva od truda autora.&rdquo;

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: We are not required to agree with the Constitution or the Supreme Court.  (At one time, they both condoned slavery.)  So their positions do not disprove the owner supremacy premise.  But I hope that the awareness that this is a radical right-wing assumption rather than a traditionally recognized one will weaken its appeal.
hr: Od nas se ne zahtijeva da se složimo s Ustavom ili Vrhovnim sudom. (U jednom trenutku, oboje su dopuštali ropstvo.) Dakle, njihovi stavovi ne pobijaju pretpostavku nadmoćnosti vlasnika. No, nadam se da će svijest o tome da je to pretpostavka radikalno desnog krila, a ne tradicionalno priznata pretpostavka, oslabiti njenu privlačnost.

note: type: Content of: <div><h3>
en: Conclusion
hr: Zaključak

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: We like to think that our society encourages helping your neighbor; but each time we reward someone for obstructionism, or admire them for the wealth they have gained in this way, we are sending the opposite message.
hr: Želimo vjerovati da naše društvo potiče pomaganje svojem susjedu, no svaki put kada nagradimo nečiju opstruktivnost, ili se divimo nečijem bogatstvu koje su stekli na ovaj način, šaljemo suprotnu poruku.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Software hoarding is one form of our general willingness to disregard the welfare of society for personal gain.  We can trace this disregard from Ronald Reagan to Dick Cheney, from Exxon to Enron, from failing banks to failing schools.  We can measure it with the size of the homeless population and the prison population.  The antisocial spirit feeds on itself, because the more we see that other people will not help us, the more it seems futile to help them.  Thus society decays into a jungle.
hr: Škrtarenje softverom jedan je oblik naše opće voljnosti da zanemarimo blagostanje društva u zamjenu za osobnu dobit. Možemo to zanemarivanje pratiti od Ronalda Reagana do Dicka Cheneya, od Exxona do Enrona, od neuspješnih banaka do neuspješnih škola. Možemo ga mjeriti veličinom beskućničke populacije i zatvorske populacije. Protudruštveni duh hrani se sam sobom, jer što više vidimo da nam drugi ljudi ne žele pomoći, više se uzaludnim čini da mi pomognemo njima. Time se društvo raspada u džunglu.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: If we don't want to live in a jungle, we must change our attitudes.  We must start sending the message that a good citizen is one who cooperates when appropriate, not one who is successful at taking from others.  I hope that the free software movement will contribute to this: at least in one area, we will replace the jungle with a more efficient system which encourages and runs on voluntary cooperation.
hr: Ne želimo li živjeti u džungli, moramo promijeniti naše stavove. Moramo početi slati poruku da je dobar građanin onaj koji surađuje kada je to svrsishodno, a ne onaj koji je uspješan u uzimanju od drugih. Nadam se da će pokret za slobodan softver tome doprinijeti: barem u jednom području, zamijenit ćemo džunglu efikasnijim sustavom koji potiče i funkcionira na dobrovoljnoj suradnji.

note: type: Content of: <div><h3>
en: Footnotes
hr: Napomene

note: type: Content of: <div><ol><li>
en: The word &ldquo;free&rdquo; in &ldquo;free software&rdquo; refers to freedom, not to price; the price paid for a copy of a free program may be zero, or small, or (rarely) quite large.
hr: Riječ &ldquo;slobodan&rdquo; u izrazu &ldquo;slobodan softver&rdquo; odnosi se na slobodu, a ne na cijenu; cijena plaćena za primjerak slobodnog programa može biti nula, ili mala, ili (rijetko) prilično velika.

note: type: Content of: <div><ol><li>
en: The issues of pollution and traffic congestion do not alter this conclusion.  If we wish to make driving more expensive to discourage driving in general, it is disadvantageous to do this using toll booths, which contribute to both pollution and congestion.  A tax on gasoline is much better.  Likewise, a desire to enhance safety by limiting maximum speed is not relevant; a free-access road enhances the average speed by avoiding stops and delays, for any given speed limit.
hr: Problemi zagađenja i prometne zagušenosti ne mijenjaju ovaj zaključak. Želimo li vožnju učiniti skupljom kako bismo destimulirali vožnju općenito, nepovoljno je to učiniti upotrebom naplatnih kućica, koje doprinose i zagađenju i zagušenju. Porez na gorivo mnogo je bolji. Jednako tako, želja da poboljšamo sigurnost ograničavajući najveću dozvoljenu brzinu nebitna je; cesta sa slobodnim pristupom povećava prosječnu brzinu izbjegavanjem zaustavljanja i zadržavanja, za bilo koje ograničenje brzine.

note: type: Content of: <div><ol><li>
en: One might regard a particular computer program as a harmful thing that should not be available at all, like the Lotus Marketplace database of personal information, which was withdrawn from sale due to public disapproval.  Most of what I say does not apply to this case, but it makes little sense to argue for having an owner on the grounds that the owner will make the program less available.  The owner will not make it <em>completely</em> unavailable, as one would wish in the case of a program whose use is considered destructive.
hr: Netko može smatrati određeni računalni program nečim štetnim što ne bi smjelo uopće biti dostupno, kao što je baza podataka osobnih informacija Lotus Marketplace, koja je povučena iz prodaje zbog neodobravanja javnosti. Većina onoga što govorim ne odnosi se na ovaj slučaj, ali nema previše smisla prepirati se zbog postojanja vlasnika na temelju toga da će vlasnici uzrokovati manju dostupnost programa. Vlasnik ga neće učiniti <em>potpuno</em> nedostupnim, kao što bismo željeli u slučaju programa čije se korištenje smatra štetnim.

note: type: Content of: <div><div><p>
en: This essay is published in <a href="https://shop.fsf.org/product/free-software-free-society/"><cite>Free Software, Free Society: The Selected Essays of Richard M. Stallman</cite></a>.
hr: Ovaj esej objavljen je u djelu <a href="https://shop.fsf.org/product/free-software-free-society/"><cite>Slobodan softver, slobodno društvo: Izabrani eseji Richarda M. Stallmana</cite></a>.

note: type: Content of: <div><div><p>
en: Please send general FSF &amp; GNU inquiries to <a href="mailto:gnu@gnu.org">&lt;gnu@gnu.org&gt;</a>.  There are also <a href="/contact/">other ways to contact</a> the FSF.  Broken links and other corrections or suggestions can be sent to <a href="mailto:webmasters@gnu.org">&lt;webmasters@gnu.org&gt;</a>.
hr: Molimo vas, općenite upite o FSF &amp; GNU šaljite na <a href="mailto:gnu@gnu.org">&lt;gnu@gnu.org&gt;</a>. Postoje i <a href="/contact/">drugi načini kontaktiranja</a> FSF-a. Prekinute poveznice i ostale ispravke ili prijedloge možete poslati na <a href="mailto:webmasters@gnu.org">&lt;webmasters@gnu.org&gt;</a>.

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: This page is licensed under a <a rel="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.
hr: Ovo djelo je dano na korištenje pod licencom <a rel="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/deed.hr">Creative Commons Imenovanje-Bez prerada 4.0 međunarodna</a>.

note: TRANSLATORS: Use space (SPC) as msgstr if you don't want credits. type: Content of: <div><div>
en: *GNUN-SLOT: TRANSLATOR'S CREDITS*
hr: <b>Prijevod</b>: Nevenko Baričević, 2013.

note: timestamp start type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Updated:
hr: Vrijeme zadnje izmjene:
