Re: [Fwd: [Fsuk-manchester] Richard Stallman talk - Manchester (1st May)]

MJ Ray wrote:
> That reminds me of a question that makes me uncomfortable because I
> don't have a good answer: why is selling licences to use the name or
> symbols of that certificate any more ethical than selling licences to
> use software?  How can you teach the ideas behind free software when
> controlling a certification scheme which necessarily denies people
> those freedom to share their certificate power and so on?
>   

Being able to reuse names/symbols is a mark of trust, which free 
software doesn't come with. It's almost the inverse: free software comes 
with basically no warranty, and I don't think it would work if you 
required distributors to warrant the quality of their changes/etc. 
That's effectively what certification schemes represent, and the 
reputation of the scheme basically stands or falls on the services of 
its members.

>> However in most cases Directors of companies are graduates because the
>> system requires that as a basic pre-requisite. [...]
>>     
>
> What system?  It's not in question 10 of
> http://www.companies-house.gov.uk/about/gbhtml/gbf1.shtml#one
>
>   "10. Can anyone be a company director?
>
>   In general terms, yes, but there are some rules. [...]"
>   

I agree with MJ here - I don't know of any company regulation requiring 
Directors to be graduates, and I set up my last company about four weeks 
ago from scratch. I didn't say anything about my qualifications one way 
or another.

Cheers,

Alex.