"your legal concepts of property, self-expression, and identity don't concern us. They are based on material concerns. There are no material concerns, here." -- John Perry Barlow, Declaration of Independance of Cyberspace The surge of publicity surrounding linux, which has occured over the past few weeks, is not uniquely accredited to the exceptional qualities of reliability of this operating system. Linux today is often employed by both parties - used as evidence against and to the defense of microsoft in the antitrust process. This immense commercial success, both well publicized and politicized, does not need to obscure the fundamental questions posed by free information systems. These are in effect one of the concrete manifestations of contradiction generated by the appearance of a new paradigm: that of human practicality, inscribed in an economy founded on the production, distribution and utilization of immaterial goods and services. Resolutely opposed to all formes of monopolistic concentration in the domain of the immaterial, the philosophies and practice of free computing constitutes a force of destabilization for the rules and values of fordian capitalism. They serve to promote, in a virulent manner, a collection of concrete alternatives to the new formes of domination which emenate from this new post-fordian economy. In de-equilibriating, that is in overturning, the systems of production, property and in turn destabilizing the systems of capital and work, does not the linux phenomenom contain the seed of a social transformation? Before we can look at the specifics of linux, it is necessary to examine this new paradigm. For certain specialists, the information economy is characterized initialiy by an increase in the gap between investment costs - essentially human capital - and marginal costs of production and distribution. By deliberately classifying work as investment, it points to one of the specific aspects: the emergence of the immaterial information economy tends to dematerialize what economists call, in their jargon, the means of production. These are in fact the collection of physical infrastructure (often burdensome) which necessitate indispensable investment to activate a system of production. This dematerialization of means of production, which has become symbols, codes, linguistic signals, mathematics and logic, skills and mindsets, reverses the traditional logic of traditional labour. By virtue of abstract work, renewable and interchangeable, the worker becomes co-owner of this new set of tools. This question about the means of production, as well as the immaterial merchandise, creates fundamental problems for the emmergence of capitalism in an information economy. For Phillipe Queau, "the most recent battle was held in geneva, in december of 1996, during the diplomatic conference on certain questions of author's rights, put in place by the world organisation on intellectual property. (WIPO?). This had to do with a revision of the Berne convention of 1886, to which the latest modification was made in 1979. This conference proved to reduce the public domain, under influence of certain lobbies, and to reinforce appropriation by the private and break the equilibrium between the owners of intellectual property and those who use it." In this article, Philippe Queau reminds us that intellectual property was invented to preserve the interests of humanity, so that a work could survive its creater. By protecting only those material forms of expression and ideas, the idea itself remains a common good, inappropriable. By blurring the distinction between idea and material expression, as in the case of blocking access to the layers of programming in computers (the source code) for example, some try to appropriate the inappropriable: that is the idea itself. In the immaterial information economy, the phenomenom of monopolistic concentration of information constitutes many obstacles, not only to technological, societal and cultural progress, but also to economic efficiency. Therefore, numerous are those, Roberto di Cosmo for example, who denounce the deeply noxious aspects of classical property concepts applied to the information economy. One of the main characteristics of this denounciation of the property regime that is salient for linux and free computing systems is that it takes the traditional formes of contestation towards property. It resides in effect less in the domain of (keynesien?) politics of social justice, requiring intervention by the state for the products of growth, but rather in the domain of competition, individual initiative and economic efficiency. By revolution, in the proper sense, against intellectual property legislation, and by transforming consumers into co-participants of technological progress and the diffusion of information, free computing inaugurates, undeniably under productive forces, a new set of attitudes towards property. The law, if it continues to protect the author who can sell his product and even make a substantial profit, also protects that of the public. This phenomenom serves to re-equilbrate the balance of owner/producer/consumer. Under these conditions, immaterial goods, products of work and common property, can not be considered merchandise entirely, which can be confiscated, accumulated and capitalized for the exclusive profit of a small group. They are the living works embedded in the regime of public property and common human good at the planetary scale. Numerous are those, who exude more or less explicitely, the post-modernist school, which takes the posture of announcing the advent of a society in which subjectivity dissolves into individualism. The arguments developed by the post-modernists procede a vision the least reductionist for the notion of informational revolution: a revolution percieved as an uncontrolled acceleration of scientific innovations and technologies, notably in the domains of computing and communications. This acceleration articulates a total loss of sense of society. The post-modernists position themselves thusly as spectators of the inevitable decline of the great values of the west: Reason, Time, Space and Communication, Mankind... The community of users, developpers and contributers to linux, who today, according to certain estimates, number close to 10 million people with a rate of growth of 100% per year, yearn to dissolve the social links in a blind backward-looking individualism. Are they not inaugurating new forms of social order? There are social considerations, which supported by free computing, far from being founded on predatory competition, have inscribed themselves into a working logic of cooperation of singular micro-initiatives. The community, composed of producers and user-consumers, is completely mobilized, not by the criteria of financial viability percieved as parasitic, but by quality and social efficiency. Economic efficiency is thus the competitional product of cooperation, a veritable collective mobilisation of intelligence which is displacing the social centre of gravity.