why-free.html - en to zh_CN translation catalogue (62 entries)

note: type: Content of: <title>
en: Why Software Should Not Have Owners - GNU Project - Free Software Foundation
zh_CN: 为什么软件不应该有所有者 - GNU工程 - 自由软件基金会

note: type: Attribute 'content' of: <meta>
en: GNU, GNU Project, FSF, Free Software, Free Software Foundation, Why Software Should Not Have Owners
zh_CN: GNU、GNU工程、FSF、自由软件、自由软件基金会、为什么软件不应该有所有者

note: type: Content of: <div><h2>
en: Why Software Should Not Have Owners
zh_CN: 为什么软件不应该有所有者

note: type: Content of: <div><address>
en: by <a href="https://www.stallman.org/">Richard Stallman</a>
zh_CN: <a href="https://www.stallman.org/">理查德·斯托曼</a> 著

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Digital information technology contributes to the world by making it easier to copy and modify information.  Computers promise to make this easier for all of us.
zh_CN: 数字信息技术对社会的贡献在于它使信息的复制和修改变得更加容易。计算机能够使每个人都可以更容易地复制和修改信息。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Not everyone wants it to be easier.  The system of copyright gives software programs &ldquo;owners,&rdquo; most of whom aim to withhold software's potential benefit from the rest of the public.  They would like to be the only ones who can copy and modify the software that we use.
zh_CN: 并非每个人都希望它更容易。版权体系赋予了软件&ldquo;所有者&rdquo;，而大多数软件所有者的目标是抑制软件带给大众的潜在利益。他们要成为唯一能够复制和修改我们所使用的软件的人。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: The copyright system grew up with printing&mdash;a technology for mass-production copying.  Copyright fit in well with this technology because it restricted only the mass producers of copies.  It did not take freedom away from readers of books.  An ordinary reader, who did not own a printing press, could copy books only with pen and ink, and few readers were sued for that.
zh_CN: 版权体系兴起于印刷术&mdash;一项大规模复制的技术。因为版权仅仅限制大规模复制，所以它很适用于该项技术。它并没有剥夺读者的自由。一个普通读者，没有印刷设备，只能用纸笔和墨水复制书籍，很少有读者会因此被告上法庭。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Digital technology is more flexible than the printing press: when information has digital form, you can easily copy it to share it with others.  This very flexibility makes a bad fit with a system like copyright.  That's the reason for the increasingly nasty and draconian measures now used to enforce software copyright.  Consider these four practices of the Software Publishers Association (SPA):
zh_CN: 数字技术比印刷设备更灵活：你可以轻易地复制数字化的信息，并与他人分享。正是这种灵活性使之很难适用于象版权这样的体系。这就是为什么现在加强软件版权的手段越来越恶劣和严苛。请思量一下软件发布者协会（SPA）的四个实践：

note: type: Content of: <div><ul><li>
en: Massive propaganda saying it is wrong to disobey the owners to help your friend.
zh_CN: 大量宣传背叛所有者去帮助朋友是错误的。

note: type: Content of: <div><ul><li>
en: Solicitation for stool pigeons to inform on their coworkers and colleagues.
zh_CN: 诱使线人举报其工友和同事。

note: type: Content of: <div><ul><li>
en: Raids (with police help) on offices and schools, in which people are told they must prove they are innocent of illegal copying.
zh_CN: 突袭（靠警察帮助）办公场所和学校，告诉人们必须自证没有从事非法复制。

note: type: Content of: <div><ul><li>
en: Prosecution (by the US government, at the SPA's request) of people such as <abbr title="Massachusetts Institute of Technology">MIT</abbr>'s David LaMacchia, not for copying software (he is not accused of copying any), but merely for leaving copying facilities unguarded and failing to censor their use.<a href="#footnote1">[1]</a>
zh_CN: 起诉（在SPA的要求下，由美国政府操作）<abbr title="Massachusetts Institute of Technology，麻省理工学院">MIT</abbr> 的 David LaMacchia 等人士，不是因为复制软件（他并没有被指控复制软件），而仅仅是因为没有看管复制设备和没有监管设备用途。<a href="#footnote1">[1]</a>

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: All four practices resemble those used in the former Soviet Union, where every copying machine had a guard to prevent forbidden copying, and where individuals had to copy information secretly and pass it from hand to hand as samizdat.  There is of course a difference: the motive for information control in the Soviet Union was political; in the US the motive is profit.  But it is the actions that affect us, not the motive.  Any attempt to block the sharing of information, no matter why, leads to the same methods and the same harshness.
zh_CN: 这四项实践都类似于前苏联使用的手段：每个复印机都有一个警卫，以防止非法复制；而个人只能秘密复制信息，然后象地下出版物似的人传人。当然也有不同之处：苏联信息控制的动机是政治；而美国的是利润。然而，影响我们的是行动，而非动机。任何阻止信息分享的企图，无论为什么，都会使用同样的手段和导致同样严酷的氛围。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Owners make several kinds of arguments for giving them the power to control how we use information:
zh_CN: 所有者为了获得控制我们如何使用信息的权力，采取了如下几种狡辩：

note: type: Content of: <div><ul><li>
en: Name calling.
zh_CN: 扣帽子。

note: type: Content of: <div><ul><li><p>
en: Owners use smear words such as &ldquo;piracy&rdquo; and &ldquo;theft,&rdquo; as well as expert terminology such as &ldquo;intellectual property&rdquo; and &ldquo;damage,&rdquo; to suggest a certain line of thinking to the public&mdash;a simplistic analogy between programs and physical objects.
zh_CN: 所有者使用诽谤性字眼，如&ldquo;盗版&rdquo;和&ldquo;偷窃&rdquo;，还使用专业术语，如&ldquo;知识产权&rdquo;和&ldquo;伤害&rdquo;，来向大众推介一种思考方式&mdash;&mdash;把程序和实物简单类比。

note: type: Content of: <div><ul><li><p>
en: Our ideas and intuitions about property for material objects are about whether it is right to <em>take an object away</em> from someone else.  They don't directly apply to <em>making a copy</em> of something.  But the owners ask us to apply them anyway.
zh_CN: 我们对实物所有权的理念和直觉是针对<em>拿走别人的东西</em>是否合适这件事。它们不能直接应用于<em>复制</em>这件事。但是，所有者就是让我们这样用。

note: type: Content of: <div><ul><li>
en: Exaggeration.
zh_CN: 夸大其词。

note: type: Content of: <div><ul><li><p>
en: Owners say that they suffer &ldquo;harm&rdquo; or &ldquo;economic loss&rdquo; when users copy programs themselves.  But the copying has no direct effect on the owner, and it harms no one.  The owner can lose only if the person who made the copy would otherwise have paid for one from the owner.
zh_CN: 所有者声称当用户自己复制程序时，他们受到了&ldquo;伤害&rdquo;或者蒙受了&ldquo;经济损失&rdquo;。但是复制对所有者并无直接影响，也没有伤害任何人。如果复制的人只能向所有者购买拷贝的话，复制才会是所有者的损失。

note: type: Content of: <div><ul><li><p>
en: A little thought shows that most such people would not have bought copies.  Yet the owners compute their &ldquo;losses&rdquo; as if each and every one would have bought a copy.  That is exaggeration&mdash;to put it kindly.
zh_CN: 进一步思考的结果是这些人中的大多数不会去购买拷贝。可是，所有者仍然按照每个人都会买拷贝来计算自己的&ldquo;损失&rdquo;。这就是夸大其词&mdash;说得客气点。

note: type: Content of: <div><ul><li>
en: The law.
zh_CN: 诉之法律。

note: type: Content of: <div><ul><li><p>
en: Owners often describe the current state of the law, and the harsh penalties they can threaten us with.  Implicit in this approach is the suggestion that today's law reflects an unquestionable view of morality&mdash;yet at the same time, we are urged to regard these penalties as facts of nature that can't be blamed on anyone.
zh_CN: 所有者经常讲述现行法律及其用来威胁我们的严厉惩罚措施。该举措暗示当今法律反映的是无可辩驳的道德准则&mdash;而与此同时，我们强烈建议视这些处罚为自然事实，它们不能归咎于任何人。

note: type: Content of: <div><ul><li><p>
en: This line of persuasion isn't designed to stand up to critical thinking; it's intended to reinforce a habitual mental pathway.
zh_CN: 此处的推理并不是用来经受批判性思考；它意在加强习惯性的心理道路。<sup><a href="#TransNote1">1</a></sup>

note: type: Content of: <div><ul><li><p>
en: It's elementary that laws don't decide right and wrong.  Every American should know that, in the 1950s, it was against the law in many states for a black person to sit in the front of a bus; but only racists would say sitting there was wrong.
zh_CN: 法律并不决定正确或者错误，这是基础。每一个美国人都应该知道，在50年代，黑人坐在公交车的前排在许多州是非法的；但是只有种族主义者才会说坐在那里是错误的。

note: type: Content of: <div><ul><li>
en: Natural rights.
zh_CN: 自然权利。

note: type: Content of: <div><ul><li><p>
en: Authors often claim a special connection with programs they have written, and go on to assert that, as a result, their desires and interests concerning the program simply outweigh those of anyone else&mdash;or even those of the whole rest of the world.  (Typically companies, not authors, hold the copyrights on software, but we are expected to ignore this discrepancy.)
zh_CN: 著作者们经常声称对其软件具有特殊关联，并据此断言，他们对软件的期望和兴趣就会超越其他人&mdash;乃至超越整个世界的所有其他人。（典型的情况是，公司而非个人拥有软件版权，但是我们在此忽略这个差异。）

note: type: Content of: <div><ul><li><p>
en: To those who propose this as an ethical axiom&mdash;the author is more important than you&mdash;I can only say that I, a notable software author myself, call it bunk.
zh_CN: 对那些建议以&mdash;作者比你更重要&mdash;为公理的人，我只能说：我，作为一个软件著作者，称之为胡说。

note: type: Content of: <div><ul><li><p>
en: But people in general are only likely to feel any sympathy with the natural rights claims for two reasons.
zh_CN: 但是一般人们只会因为两个原因才可能赞同对自然权利的申明。

note: type: Content of: <div><ul><li><p>
en: One reason is an overstretched analogy with material objects.  When I cook spaghetti, I do object if someone else eats it, because then I cannot eat it.  His action hurts me exactly as much as it benefits him; only one of us can eat the spaghetti, so the question is, which one? The smallest distinction between us is enough to tip the ethical balance.
zh_CN: 一个原因是对实物类比的过度推广。当我做意大利面条时，我会反对别人吃它，因为那样我就没的吃了。对方获利的多少和对我的伤害正好相当；我们两个只有一个人可以吃到面条，所以问题是：哪个人是谁？我们之间最小的差异都足以打破道德的平衡。

note: type: Content of: <div><ul><li><p>
en: But whether you run or change a program I wrote affects you directly and me only indirectly.  Whether you give a copy to your friend affects you and your friend much more than it affects me.  I shouldn't have the power to tell you not to do these things.  No one should.
zh_CN: 但是你是否运行或修改我写的程序直接影响的是你，对我的影响只是间接的。你是否给予朋友一份拷贝对你和你朋友的影响远大于对我的影响。我不应该有权力告知你不要这么做。任何人都不该拥有这个权力。

note: type: Content of: <div><ul><li><p>
en: The second reason is that people have been told that natural rights for authors is the accepted and unquestioned tradition of our society.
zh_CN: 另一个原因是人们被告知作者的自然权利是被认可的、无可辩驳的社会传统。

note: type: Content of: <div><ul><li><p>
en: As a matter of history, the opposite is true.  The idea of natural rights of authors was proposed and decisively rejected when the US Constitution was drawn up.  That's why the Constitution only <em>permits</em> a system of copyright and does not <em>require</em> one; that's why it says that copyright must be temporary.  It also states that the purpose of copyright is to promote progress&mdash;not to reward authors.  Copyright does reward authors somewhat, and publishers more, but that is intended as a means of modifying their behavior.
zh_CN: 从历史来看，正好相反。起草美国宪法时，作者的自然权利就已被提出并且被一致否决。这就是为什么宪法仅<em>允许</em>而不是<em>要求</em>有一个版权系统；这就是为什么宪法说版权必须是有时限的。宪法还阐述了版权的目的是促进发展&mdash;而不是奖励作者。版权确实回报了作者些许，回报出版商更多，但作为手段，回报意在改变他们的行为。

note: type: Content of: <div><ul><li><p>
en: The real established tradition of our society is that copyright cuts into the natural rights of the public&mdash;and that this can only be justified for the public's sake.
zh_CN: 我们社会建立的真正传统是版权消减了公众的自然权利&mdash;而它只能按照公众的利益来评判。

note: type: Content of: <div><ul><li>
en: Economics.
zh_CN: 经济因素。

note: type: Content of: <div><ul><li><p>
en: The final argument made for having owners of software is that this leads to production of more software.
zh_CN: 最后一个论证软件应该有所有者的论点是这样可以产出更多的软件。

note: type: Content of: <div><ul><li><p>
en: Unlike the others, this argument at least takes a legitimate approach to the subject.  It is based on a valid goal&mdash;satisfying the users of software.  And it is empirically clear that people will produce more of something if they are well paid for doing so.
zh_CN: 和其他几个论点不同，该论点至少对此问题采取了一种合理的解法。

note: type: Content of: <div><ul><li><p>
en: But the economic argument has a flaw: it is based on the assumption that the difference is only a matter of how much money we have to pay.  It assumes that <em>production of software</em> is what we want, whether the software has owners or not.
zh_CN: 但是这个经济学的论点有一个漏洞：它的基础假设是差别仅在于我们付多少钱。它假设我们要的是<em>软件产品</em>，无论软件是否有所有者。

note: type: Content of: <div><ul><li><p>
en: People readily accept this assumption because it accords with our experiences with material objects.  Consider a sandwich, for instance.  You might well be able to get an equivalent sandwich either gratis or for a price.  If so, the amount you pay is the only difference.  Whether or not you have to buy it, the sandwich has the same taste, the same nutritional value, and in either case you can only eat it once.  Whether you get the sandwich from an owner or not cannot directly affect anything but the amount of money you have afterwards.
zh_CN: 因为符合我们对实物的经验，人们就轻易地接受了这个假设。举个例子，拿三明治来说吧。假设你可以免费或付费获得同样的一个三明治。这样，你所付的钱就是唯一的差别。无论你是否花钱买，这个三明治的口味一样、营养价值也一样，你也只能吃一次。你是否从其所有者来购买除了影响你付钱的多少，也不会再影响别的什么。

note: type: Content of: <div><ul><li><p>
en: This is true for any kind of material object&mdash;whether or not it has an owner does not directly affect what it <em>is</em>, or what you can do with it if you acquire it.
zh_CN: 这个道理对其他实物也一样成立&mdash;无论它是否有所有者并不直接影响它<em>是</em>什么，也不影响你获得它之后会怎么对待它。

note: type: Content of: <div><ul><li><p>
en: But if a program has an owner, this very much affects what it is, and what you can do with a copy if you buy one.  The difference is not just a matter of money.  The system of owners of software encourages software owners to produce something&mdash;but not what society really needs.  And it causes intangible ethical pollution that affects us all.
zh_CN: 但是如果软件有所有者，它是什么就受到很大的影响，也会影响购买它之后你对其拷贝的所作所为。差别就不只是花钱多少。软件所有者系统会鼓励软件所有者制作软件&mdash;但不是社会真正的需求。它造成了影响我们大家的难以形容的道德污染。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: What does society need? It needs information that is truly available to its citizens&mdash;for example, programs that people can read, fix, adapt, and improve, not just operate.  But what software owners typically deliver is a black box that we can't study or change.
zh_CN: 社会的需求是什么？它需要每个社会公民都能真正享有的信息&mdash;例如，人们可以研读、修正、改造和提高的程序，而不只是操作运行。然而软件所有者典型的交付是一个我们无法学习或修改的黑盒。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Society also needs freedom.  When a program has an owner, the users lose freedom to control part of their own lives.
zh_CN: 社会还需要自由。如果软件有所有者，软件用户就失去了控制他们生活的部分自由。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: And, above all, society needs to encourage the spirit of voluntary cooperation in its citizens.  When software owners tell us that helping our neighbors in a natural way is &ldquo;piracy,&rdquo; they pollute our society's civic spirit.
zh_CN: 最重要的是，社会需要鼓励其公民志愿互助的精神。当软件所有者告诉我们以自然的方式帮助邻居是&ldquo;盗版&rdquo;，他们就是在污染社会的文明精神。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: This is why we say that <a href="/philosophy/free-sw.html">free software</a> is a matter of freedom, not price.
zh_CN: 这就是为什么我们说<a href="/philosophy/free-sw.html">自由软件（free software）</a>关乎自由，无关价格。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: The economic argument for owners is erroneous, but the economic issue is real.  Some people write useful software for the pleasure of writing it or for admiration and love; but if we want more software than those people write, we need to raise funds.
zh_CN: 尽管所有者的经济学论点是错误的，但是经济学的问题是现实的。有些人为了快乐而编写有用的软件，有些人为了赞美和爱情而编写有用的软件；但是如果我们要编写超越这些人的更多软件，我们需要资金。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Since the 1980s, free software developers have tried various methods of finding funds, with some success.  There's no need to make anyone rich; a typical income is plenty of incentive to do many jobs that are less satisfying than programming.
zh_CN: 自从19世纪80年代以来，自由软件的开发者一直尝试用各种方法获得资金，有些获得了成功。并不需要让任何人变得富有；一个正常的收入就会是人们从事许多工作的足够激励，而这些工作还不象编程这样有成就感。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: For years, until a fellowship made it unnecessary, I made a living from custom enhancements of the free software I had written.  Each enhancement was added to the standard released version and thus eventually became available to the general public.  Clients paid me so that I would work on the enhancements they wanted, rather than on the features I would otherwise have considered highest priority.
zh_CN: 有许多年来，我一直靠为客户定制我编写的自由软件来谋生，直到固定资助<sup><a href="#TransNote2">2</a></sup>让我不必再那样做。我的每个定制都添加到了标准发布版中，从而最终为大众所用。客户付钱给我，我就会开发他们需要的功能而不是我认为最优先的功能。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Some free software developers make money by selling support services.  In 1994, Cygnus Support, with around 50 employees, estimated that about 15 percent of its staff activity was free software development&mdash;a respectable percentage for a software company.
zh_CN: 有些自由软件开发者通过销售技术服务获得收入。在1994年，Cygnus Support公司，大概有50个员工，估计其员工15%的工作是进行自由软件的开发&mdash;对一个软件公司来说这是一个值得尊敬的比例。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: In the early 1990s, companies including Intel, Motorola, Texas Instruments and Analog Devices combined to fund the continued development of the GNU C compiler.  Most GCC development is still done by paid developers.  The GNU compiler for the Ada language was funded in the 90s by the US Air Force, and continued since then by a company formed specifically for the purpose.
zh_CN: 在19世纪90年代，包括Intel、Motorola、Texas Instruments和Analog Devices在内的多家公司联合资助GNU C编译器的继续开发。GCC的主要开发仍然是由付费开发者做出的。针对Ada语言的GNU编译器是在90年代由美国空军资助的，之后由因此而成立的一家公司继续开发。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: The free software movement is still small, but the example of listener-supported radio in the US shows it's possible to support a large activity without forcing each user to pay.
zh_CN: 自由软件的规模还不大，但是美国由听众支持的电台作为例子已经表明，它可以支持大规模的活动而无需强迫每个用户都付费。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: As a computer user today, you may find yourself using a <a href="/philosophy/categories.html#ProprietarySoftware">proprietary</a> program.  If your friend asks to make a copy, it would be wrong to refuse.  Cooperation is more important than copyright.  But underground, closet cooperation does not make for a good society.  A person should aspire to live an upright life openly with pride, and this means saying no to proprietary software.
zh_CN: 作为当今的计算机用户，你可能正在使用<a href="/philosophy/categories.html#ProprietarySoftware">专属</a>程序。如果你的朋友来要一份拷贝，拒绝可能是不对的。合作比版权更重要。但是地下的、遮掩的合作不是一个好社会应有的。人们应该自豪地公开追求正直的生活，这就意味着要对专属软件说不。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: You deserve to be able to cooperate openly and freely with other people who use software.  You deserve to be able to learn how the software works, and to teach your students with it.  You deserve to be able to hire your favorite programmer to fix it when it breaks.
zh_CN: 你有权公开和自由地与其他软件用户合作。你有权学习软件如何工作，并教会你的学生。你有权雇佣你喜欢的程序员为你修复程序。

note: type: Content of: <div><p>
en: You deserve free software.
zh_CN: 你有权拥有自由软件。

note: type: Content of: <div><h3>
en: Footnote
zh_CN: 脚注

note: type: Content of: <div><ol><li>
en: The charges were subsequently dismissed.
zh_CN: 这些指控都先后被驳回了。

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>.
zh_CN: 本文发表于<a href="https://shop.fsf.org/product/free-software-free-society/"><cite>自由软件、自由社会：理查德.M.斯托曼 选集</cite></a>。

note: TRANSLATORS: Use space (SPC) as msgstr if you don't have notes. type: Content of: <div>
en: *GNUN-SLOT: TRANSLATOR'S NOTES*
zh_CN: <h3>译注</h3>
    <ol>
    <li id="TransNote1">mental pathway，思想常常循着常规进行，这种趋势， 心理学上称之为&ldquo;心理的道路&rdquo;。</li>
    <li id="TransNote2">原文是fellowship，一个虚职，有类似奖学金的收入。</li>
    </ol>

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>.
zh_CN: 请将有关自由软件基金会(FSF) &amp; GNU 的一般性问题发送到<a href="mailto:gnu@gnu.org">&lt;gnu@gnu.org&gt;</a>。也可以通过 <a href="/contact/">其他联系方法</a> 联系自由软件基金会(FSF)。有关失效链接或其他错误和建议，请发送邮件到<a href="mailto:webmasters@gnu.org">&lt;webmasters@gnu.org&gt;</a>。

note: TRANSLATORS: Ignore the original text in this paragraph, replace it with the translation of these two: We work hard and do our best to provide accurate, good quality translations.  However, we are not exempt from imperfection. Please send your comments and general suggestions in this regard to <a hr
en: Please see the <a href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations README</a> for information on coordinating and contributing translations of this article.
zh_CN: 我们尽最大努力来提供精准和高质量的翻译，但难免会存在错误和不足。如果您在这方面有评论或一般性的建议，请发送至 <a href="mailto:web-translators@gnu.org">&lt;web-translators@gnu.org&gt;</a>。</p><p>关于进行协调与提交翻译的更多信息参见 <a href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">《译者指南》</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>.
zh_CN: 本页面使用 <a rel="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a> 授权。

note: TRANSLATORS: Use space (SPC) as msgstr if you don't want credits. type: Content of: <div><div>
en: *GNUN-SLOT: TRANSLATOR'S CREDITS*
zh_CN: <b>翻译团队</b>：<a rel="team" href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-zh-cn/">&lt;CTT&gt;</a>，2017，2020，2021。

note: timestamp start type: Content of: <div><p>
en: Updated:
zh_CN: 最后更新：
