* better terminology to promote freedom
@ 2022-03-20 23:49 Leah Rowe via libreplanet-discuss
2022-03-20 23:58 ` Valentino Giudice
` (3 more replies)
0 siblings, 4 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: Leah Rowe via libreplanet-discuss @ 2022-03-20 23:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: libreplanet-discuss
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1357 bytes --]
Hi everyone,
I started this on twitter[1] and mastodon[2], but thought I'd also
start the discussion here, where likeminded people exist who, I
believe, can contribute to this discussion. My questions relate to
terminology regarding "free software" and "proprietary software". Here
goes:
I've been thinking: what if we had a better term than "free software"
to say "free software"? Same ideological zeal, in an unambiguous
fashion. This question pertains to English-speaking communities.
I have decided to say "freedom software".
Also: "freedom hardware".
Thoughts?
The other fallback term, which I've sometimes used already, is
"freedom-respecting software".
All software I release is also free of charge. That said, I want there
to be no (or less) ambiguity about what I mean when I talk about
software or hardware. I'm in favour of *freedom*.
Another problem: what should we say when referring to proprietary
software?
Many people, especially in the west, view "proprietary" as a good
thing. They see "property" and think you don't own free software (yet,
you do own your copy).
I propose the term "restricted software".
References:
[1] https://nitter.net/n4of7/status/1505679592996032512
[2] https://mas.to/@libreleah/107991334172217870
--
Freedom is good.
Non-freedom is bad.
Defend freedom!
[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 184 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread* Re: better terminology to promote freedom 2022-03-20 23:49 better terminology to promote freedom Leah Rowe via libreplanet-discuss @ 2022-03-20 23:58 ` Valentino Giudice 2022-03-21 0:06 ` Leah Rowe via libreplanet-discuss 2022-03-21 0:24 ` Yuchen Pei ` (2 subsequent siblings) 3 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread From: Valentino Giudice @ 2022-03-20 23:58 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Leah Rowe; +Cc: LibrePlanet-discuss [-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 485 bytes --] I've heard "freedom software" too, but it's slightly weird. Surely "freedom-respecting software" conveys the idea, but it is longer and, I believe, less prone to being treated as a "technical" term with an objective definition and a common understanding (which is useful when the term ends up in the law). Why not "libre software"? It's already common, it's easily understood by any English-speaking person (because they will know "liberty") and better translates to other languages. [-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/plain, Size: 508 bytes --] I've heard "freedom software" too, but it's slightly weird. Surely "freedom-respecting software" conveys the idea, but it is longer and, I believe, less prone to being treated as a "technical" term with an objective definition and a common understanding (which is useful when the term ends up in the law). Why not "libre software"? It's already common, it's easily understood by any English-speaking person (because they will know "liberty") and better translates to other languages. [-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 184 bytes --] _______________________________________________ libreplanet-discuss mailing list libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: better terminology to promote freedom 2022-03-20 23:58 ` Valentino Giudice @ 2022-03-21 0:06 ` Leah Rowe via libreplanet-discuss 2022-03-21 0:16 ` Aaron Wolf 2022-03-21 0:20 ` Aaron Wolf 0 siblings, 2 replies; 11+ messages in thread From: Leah Rowe via libreplanet-discuss @ 2022-03-21 0:06 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Valentino Giudice; +Cc: LibrePlanet-discuss [-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1201 bytes --] On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 00:58:35 +0100 Valentino Giudice <valentino.giudice96@gmail.com> wrote: > I've heard "freedom software" too, but it's slightly weird. Surely > "freedom-respecting software" conveys the idea, but it is longer and, > I believe, less prone to being treated as a "technical" term with an > objective definition and a common understanding (which is useful when > the term ends up in the law). > > Why not "libre software"? It's already common, it's easily understood > by any English-speaking person (because they will know "liberty") and > better translates to other languages. Well, "libre" is great too, but I get the impression that not all English speakers understand its meaning when they first see it. It's largely a translation of words from other languages. The term "freedom" is well-understood by English speakers, and it is mostly unambiguous. Also, many people know English as a second or third language and in such cases, the word is still well-understood. I'm sceptical about the term "libre", just because it's not the default word in English-speaking countries (freedom is the default word, for the intended meaning we wish to convey). [-- Attachment #1.2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --] [-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 184 bytes --] _______________________________________________ libreplanet-discuss mailing list libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: better terminology to promote freedom 2022-03-21 0:06 ` Leah Rowe via libreplanet-discuss @ 2022-03-21 0:16 ` Aaron Wolf 2022-03-21 0:20 ` Aaron Wolf 1 sibling, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread From: Aaron Wolf @ 2022-03-21 0:16 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Leah Rowe, Valentino Giudice; +Cc: LibrePlanet-discuss Hi Leah, my talk from Saturday focused a lot on the question of terminology, though I didn't get into this specific topic more than a little. Freedom as a noun is good, "software freedom" But for adjective, I like FLO for Free/Libre/Open. It's not just a junk term, it writes and pronounces nicely. The sound being like "flow" is fine, that connotation fits. More on that at https://wiki.snowdrift.coop/about/free-libre-open It's definitely not about being ideologically neutral, it's about strong care about all the political principles. I also agree that "proprietary" is ineffective in a lot of ways. But your critique is a bit off. Proprietary *does* mean property. It's an adjective for property. And I'd argue that we don't "own" free software copies, we own computer devices, and those devices can have whatever patterns of bits. What non-free licenses do is they tell us that we are legally blocked from freely using our own computing devices. I think we would do well to focus on that type of ownership and not ownership of software. Ownership of software really means ownership of copyright. And when we have a free software license, we are legally licensed under the owner's copyright, and the license grants us all the freedoms. But this doesn't resolve how to better talk about proprietary software. If we go with FLO, then we can say non-FLO. And one thing I like about that is that it makes FLO the default. But I'd prefer a stronger term. In my talk, I focused on the economics of abundant vs scarce and open vs exclusive. And within the four types of goods, proprietary software is "club goods" which means abundant but exclusive. And it makes sense to use that language maybe. Proprietary software is "exclusive club-goods software" or maybe "exclusive software". And if people ask, "what do you mean it's exclusive, anyone can get it", the answer is, "it's exclusive to those who accept the ads, the terms and restrictions, and/or pay the license fee; that's how you join the exclusive club!" Or in some cases, it's "access and use of the software isn't exclusive, but the rights to share and to adapt the software is exclusively reserved, so you don't have those freedoms. That's why it's still a form of exclusive software." Some people won't mind that software is exclusive, but there's no simple word that can explain what's wrong without explaining why software freedom matters. And as long as we talk about the exclusive club, we can also emphasize that there are certain people who set and change the rules for the club, that it's not democratic. With this language, we are making it clear to people how to think about their RELATIONSHIP to the software and the software providers and the economics of it. All that said, I think "restricted software" is FINE, that's a good option and superior to "proprietary" for most cases. My inclination at this point is actually to prefer "restricted software". So, I think it's good to have two terms that can be presented as opposing. "FLO software" and "restricted software" works well IMO. Best, Aaron Wolf On 2022-03-20 17:06, Leah Rowe via libreplanet-discuss wrote: > > > On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 00:58:35 +0100 > Valentino Giudice <valentino.giudice96@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I've heard "freedom software" too, but it's slightly weird. Surely >> "freedom-respecting software" conveys the idea, but it is longer and, >> I believe, less prone to being treated as a "technical" term with an >> objective definition and a common understanding (which is useful when >> the term ends up in the law). >> >> Why not "libre software"? It's already common, it's easily understood >> by any English-speaking person (because they will know "liberty") and >> better translates to other languages. > > Well, "libre" is great too, but I get the impression that not all > English speakers understand its meaning when they first see it. It's > largely a translation of words from other languages. > > The term "freedom" is well-understood by English speakers, and it is > mostly unambiguous. Also, many people know English as a second or third > language and in such cases, the word is still well-understood. > > I'm sceptical about the term "libre", just because it's not the default > word in English-speaking countries (freedom is the default word, for > the intended meaning we wish to convey). > > > _______________________________________________ > libreplanet-discuss mailing list > libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org > https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss _______________________________________________ libreplanet-discuss mailing list libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: better terminology to promote freedom 2022-03-21 0:06 ` Leah Rowe via libreplanet-discuss 2022-03-21 0:16 ` Aaron Wolf @ 2022-03-21 0:20 ` Aaron Wolf 1 sibling, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread From: Aaron Wolf @ 2022-03-21 0:20 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Leah Rowe, Valentino Giudice; +Cc: LibrePlanet-discuss Hi Leah, my talk from Saturday focused a lot on the question of terminology, though I didn't get into this specific topic more than a little. Freedom as a noun is good, "software freedom" But for adjective, I like FLO for Free/Libre/Open. It's not just a junk term, it writes and pronounces nicely. The sound being like "flow" is fine, that connotation fits. More on that at https://wiki.snowdrift.coop/about/free-libre-open It's definitely not about being ideologically neutral, it's about strong care about all the political principles. I also agree that "proprietary" is ineffective in a lot of ways. But your critique is a bit off. Proprietary *does* mean property. It's an adjective for property. And I'd argue that we don't "own" free software copies, we own computer devices, and those devices can have whatever patterns of bits. What non-free licenses do is they tell us that we are legally blocked from freely using our own computing devices. I think we would do well to focus on that type of ownership and not ownership of software. Ownership of software really means ownership of copyright. And when we have a free software license, we are legally licensed under the owner's copyright, and the license grants us all the freedoms. But this doesn't resolve how to better talk about proprietary software. If we go with FLO, then we can say non-FLO. And one thing I like about that is that it makes FLO the default. But I'd prefer a stronger term. In my talk, I focused on the economics of abundant vs scarce and open vs exclusive. And within the four types of goods, proprietary software is "club goods" which means abundant but exclusive. And it makes sense to use that language maybe. Proprietary software is "exclusive club-goods software" or maybe "exclusive software". And if people ask, "what do you mean it's exclusive, anyone can get it", the answer is, "it's exclusive to those who accept the ads, the terms and restrictions, and/or pay the license fee; that's how you join the exclusive club!" Or in some cases, it's "access and use of the software isn't exclusive, but the rights to share and to adapt the software is exclusively reserved, so you don't have those freedoms. That's why it's still a form of exclusive software." Some people won't mind that software is exclusive, but there's no simple word that can explain what's wrong without explaining why software freedom matters. And as long as we talk about the exclusive club, we can also emphasize that there are certain people who set and change the rules for the club, that it's not democratic. With this language, we are making it clear to people how to think about their RELATIONSHIP to the software and the software providers and the economics of it. All that said, I think "restricted software" is FINE, that's a good option and superior to "proprietary" for most cases. My inclination at this point is actually to prefer "restricted software". So, I think it's good to have two terms that can be presented as opposing. "FLO software" and "restricted software" works well IMO. Best, Aaron Wolf P.S. sorry if double-sending, strange Thunderbird glitches just now On 2022-03-20 17:06, Leah Rowe via libreplanet-discuss wrote: > > > On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 00:58:35 +0100 > Valentino Giudice <valentino.giudice96@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I've heard "freedom software" too, but it's slightly weird. Surely >> "freedom-respecting software" conveys the idea, but it is longer and, >> I believe, less prone to being treated as a "technical" term with an >> objective definition and a common understanding (which is useful when >> the term ends up in the law). >> >> Why not "libre software"? It's already common, it's easily understood >> by any English-speaking person (because they will know "liberty") and >> better translates to other languages. > > Well, "libre" is great too, but I get the impression that not all > English speakers understand its meaning when they first see it. It's > largely a translation of words from other languages. > > The term "freedom" is well-understood by English speakers, and it is > mostly unambiguous. Also, many people know English as a second or third > language and in such cases, the word is still well-understood. > > I'm sceptical about the term "libre", just because it's not the default > word in English-speaking countries (freedom is the default word, for > the intended meaning we wish to convey). > > > _______________________________________________ > libreplanet-discuss mailing list > libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org > https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss _______________________________________________ libreplanet-discuss mailing list libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: better terminology to promote freedom 2022-03-20 23:49 better terminology to promote freedom Leah Rowe via libreplanet-discuss 2022-03-20 23:58 ` Valentino Giudice @ 2022-03-21 0:24 ` Yuchen Pei 2022-03-21 0:46 ` Leah Rowe via libreplanet-discuss 2022-03-21 5:55 ` Jean Louis 2022-03-22 11:09 ` Leah Rowe via libreplanet-discuss 3 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread From: Yuchen Pei @ 2022-03-21 0:24 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Leah Rowe via libreplanet-discuss; +Cc: Leah Rowe [-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1184 bytes --] On Sun 2022-03-20 23:49:20 +0000, Leah Rowe via libreplanet-discuss wrote: > Hi everyone, > > I started this on twitter[1] and mastodon[2], but thought I'd also > start the discussion here, where likeminded people exist who, I > believe, can contribute to this discussion. My questions relate to > terminology regarding "free software" and "proprietary software". Here > goes: > > I've been thinking: what if we had a better term than "free software" > to say "free software"? Same ideological zeal, in an unambiguous > fashion. This question pertains to English-speaking communities. > > I have decided to say "freedom software". > Also: "freedom hardware". > > Thoughts? I don't see any problem with "free software". Software is like speech, or knowledge, and where a "free" qualification should mean freedom. It is unfortunate that it has been interpreted as "gratis" by some people. TBH there are more important issues to deal with in free software movement than agonising over the terminology "free software". Best, Yuchen -- PGP Key: 47F9 D050 1E11 8879 9040 4941 2126 7E93 EF86 DFD0 <https://ypei.org/assets/ypei-pubkey.txt> [-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 227 bytes --] [-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 184 bytes --] _______________________________________________ libreplanet-discuss mailing list libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: better terminology to promote freedom 2022-03-21 0:24 ` Yuchen Pei @ 2022-03-21 0:46 ` Leah Rowe via libreplanet-discuss 2022-03-22 18:36 ` Preston Miller Firestone via libreplanet-discuss 0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread From: Leah Rowe via libreplanet-discuss @ 2022-03-21 0:46 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Yuchen Pei; +Cc: Leah Rowe via libreplanet-discuss [-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1745 bytes --] > I don't see any problem with "free software". Software is like > speech, or knowledge, and where a "free" qualification should mean > freedom. It is unfortunate that it has been interpreted as "gratis" > by some people. > > TBH there are more important issues to deal with in free software > movement than agonising over the terminology "free software". > Go on startpage.com, in a private browser window, with browser data scrubbed, and search: "free software" Then again, "freedom software" also brings up interesting results. In my search, FSF's free software definition *does* appear on the first page, but the page is littered with links to merely gratis software too. If I search "libre software", I do get links to a few projects, namely libreoffice and librecad, but still, not a lot of good results. Now search "open source". It has much higher quality results. We need to gain household recognition, and I think we can do that by using the term "freedom" while avoiding the term "free". Based purely on looking at first page on search engine, "freedom software" and "software freedom" already give higher quality results than "free software". The word "freedom" is unambiguous in people's minds. Think of it this way: If you're explaining it to someone new, and they're only half paying attention, they're probably doing the verbal conversation equivalent of "skim reading", picking up keywords in what you're saying. I think this is most people, when we sell our ideas to them. You need a strong terminology that piques people's interest, when they're otherwise not inclined to listen. "Freedom" is a very positive word that always gets a response from people, I've found. [-- Attachment #1.2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --] [-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 184 bytes --] _______________________________________________ libreplanet-discuss mailing list libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: better terminology to promote freedom 2022-03-21 0:46 ` Leah Rowe via libreplanet-discuss @ 2022-03-22 18:36 ` Preston Miller Firestone via libreplanet-discuss 2022-03-24 2:29 ` Jean Louis 0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread From: Preston Miller Firestone via libreplanet-discuss @ 2022-03-22 18:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: libreplanet-discuss; +Cc: sent.2022-03 TL;DR: Testing search terms related to "free software" in duckduckgo" This is a really interesting experiment. I tried searching several variations on "free software" with duckduckgo; here are some summaries of the first-page results, followed by some of my thoughts: "free software" returned results recommending software that we would call "gratis", like Photoshop Express, right next to software we would call "free", like the GNU image manipulation program. Most of the other results are focused on software that can be downloaded without paying, rather than software that respects the user's freedom. A noteable exception on the first page is sourceforge, but their result says "free open source software". "freedom software" returns a few software products with "freedom" in their name, but near the bottom of the first page is a link to the Software Freedom Law Center's home page. "software freedom" returns results including the GNU project, the Software Freedom Conservancy, the Software Freedom School, and the Software Freedom Law Center. "open source" returns what you'd expect: sourceforge.com, opensource.org, and several blog posts telling what open source software is (including one from IBM) or listing the top N open source programs. "libre software", again, returns software with "libre" in the name (libreoffice, libreCAD), and the Spanish version of gnu.org. Duckduckgo also proposes the wikipedia page for "free software" beside the search results. I think that Leah is correct that "free software" is usually interpreted as "gratis". I, for one, spent years searching "free software" or "free version of [program]" before I ever learned about the free software movement. Indeed, I only found out about our movement through the open source movement's marketing! On the other hand, "free software", to those in the know, means something very specific; it's not worth abandoning almost four decades of work because of an unfortunate ambiguity. Indeed, "freedom" has become something of a shibboleth for me: if the program isn't described as "free", I'll avoid using it. Thanks for reading, Preston _______________________________________________ libreplanet-discuss mailing list libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: better terminology to promote freedom 2022-03-22 18:36 ` Preston Miller Firestone via libreplanet-discuss @ 2022-03-24 2:29 ` Jean Louis 0 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread From: Jean Louis @ 2022-03-24 2:29 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Preston Miller Firestone; +Cc: libreplanet-discuss, sent.2022-03 * Preston Miller Firestone via libreplanet-discuss <libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org> [2022-03-23 17:22]: > TL;DR: Testing search terms related to "free software" in > duckduckgo" As Duckduckgo recently clearly stated that they can and will manipulate specific search terms to be lower ranked than it should be; I can't say that this search engine is behaving ethically and that it can be used as ethical standard for these measures you presented. > "free software" returned results recommending software that we would > call "gratis", like Photoshop Express, right next to software we would > call "free", like the GNU image manipulation program. Most of the other > results are focused on software that can be downloaded without > paying, rather than software that respects the user's freedom. A > noteable exception on the first page is sourceforge, but their result > says "free open source software". When presenting results of an URL, then I recommend to post the URL itself. There is also difference if you used terms - [free software] with quotes or - [free software] without quotes Here is one example for "free software" with quotes: https://searx.tiekoetter.com/search?q=%22free+software%22 And I get 5 examples of "free software" as in the definition from free software philosophy, while other examples are not relevant. Though my result is quite different from your above described result, I did not get any information about Photoshop Express for example. In general I don't think you or we shall rely on automated search engines to give us some standards of how words should be used. Jean Take action in Free Software Foundation campaigns: https://www.fsf.org/campaigns In support of Richard M. Stallman https://stallmansupport.org/ _______________________________________________ libreplanet-discuss mailing list libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: better terminology to promote freedom 2022-03-20 23:49 better terminology to promote freedom Leah Rowe via libreplanet-discuss 2022-03-20 23:58 ` Valentino Giudice 2022-03-21 0:24 ` Yuchen Pei @ 2022-03-21 5:55 ` Jean Louis 2022-03-22 11:09 ` Leah Rowe via libreplanet-discuss 3 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread From: Jean Louis @ 2022-03-21 5:55 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Leah Rowe; +Cc: libreplanet-discuss * Leah Rowe via libreplanet-discuss <libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org> [2022-03-21 02:51]: > I have decided to say "freedom software". > Also: "freedom hardware". Why do you think that it is necessary? I don't think it is necessary. Words have few definitions and in various context, so when you have good context there is no mistake. The GNU GPL license is clear on what is "free software". "free" is adjective, while "freedom" is noun, it is not quite proper. Then one shall not think for English only, but for other languages. If you wish to translate "free" to other languages that becomes meaningful. Don't narrow these considerations to English only. > The other fallback term, which I've sometimes used already, is > "freedom-respecting software". I am not English native speaker, though that sounds better. And I don't mean it as permanent replacement for "free software", though as different way of expression. > All software I release is also free of charge. Though in free software it is not relevant. You can as well sell it. I have some technical drawings published under GNU Free Documentation License and I sell it, though give clear information that other person can sell it too and also publish it if they want. Same can be done with software. If you would say "Pay 10 dollars for download" people would pay, download it, you would get better information who is appreciating it more. You can as well put some payment links or Bitcoin addresses for donations. For free software is just fine to sell it for whatever prices. > That said, I want there to be no (or less) ambiguity about what I > mean when I talk about software or hardware. I'm in favour of > *freedom*. I don't think you would get less ambiguity, I find it is subjective impression. As non-English speaker I have not had any ambiguity when reading "free software" since 1999. Maybe because I was reading about it also in German language (German "freie Software") so there was no doubt. I do not agree with expression "free and open source" as that is one which may give more ambiguity, as one then compares "open source" and "free" -- does it mean it is free of charge and open source? If it matters that software is free of charge, that means it sails away from meaning of "free software" as free software is not free of charge. It is sold over the world all the time for good money, often bundled on hosting packages or on computers, sold on DVDs. > Another problem: what should we say when referring to proprietary > software? I think you have a boring day and you invent problems out of nothing. > Many people, especially in the west, view "proprietary" as a good > thing. In free software movement we do not adapt ourselves not ethically to what other people like or find as good thing. We promote free software as such. 1. proprietary -- (protected by trademark or patent or copyright; made or produced or distributed by one having exclusive rights; The definition is very clear. If somebody finds it good to have exclusive rights, we in free software movement don't find it good, and that is why we like and create free software. > They see "property" and think you don't own free software (yet, you > do own your copy). That is your subjective impression. I don't see it so, never have seen it that way. While you do "own" copy of software, you do not automatically own copyrights, you get permissions to do with it, you get the four freedoms. On your contributions you can get copyrights. You wish to say following: - when I say "free" or "proprietary" the other party does not understand me, so let me change the words I use; Instead, explain the context. It is not hard as the GNU GPL license already explains the context of free software and proprietary software. > I propose the term "restricted software". Proposal is totally out of the context. You wanted to remove ambiguities, though by talking about "restricted" software instead of "proprietary software" one cannot any more without explanation understand how exactly this software is restricted. There is no relevancy to exclusive rights and copyrights. "Proprietary" gives direct relation, "restricted" not. Linux kernel is restricted software by many means, for example it may or may not provide proper drivers. Computer may not run because there are no free drivers and perception may be at some users that it is restricted software. GNU/Linux system is restricted software, it cannot run proprietary software packages, not so easy as they are not made for it. chrootuid runs in restricted environment rush is GNU restricted user shell Too many ambiguities. Jean Take action in Free Software Foundation campaigns: https://www.fsf.org/campaigns In support of Richard M. Stallman https://stallmansupport.org/ _______________________________________________ libreplanet-discuss mailing list libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: better terminology to promote freedom 2022-03-20 23:49 better terminology to promote freedom Leah Rowe via libreplanet-discuss ` (2 preceding siblings ...) 2022-03-21 5:55 ` Jean Louis @ 2022-03-22 11:09 ` Leah Rowe via libreplanet-discuss 3 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread From: Leah Rowe via libreplanet-discuss @ 2022-03-22 11:09 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Leah Rowe; +Cc: Leah Rowe via libreplanet-discuss [-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 580 bytes --] Hi everyone, The other day, I proposed the term "freedom software" as a less ambiguous way to say "free software". I've heard people's comments and criticisms about this, and I've decided: I will not use it. Instead, I will try to say "libre software" more often than "free software". I will continue to say "proprietary software" when referring to non-libre software. I may say "freedom-respecting software", sometimes. I wish to avoid confusion among new people, so I will avoid the term "free software". Thank you everyone for your comments. ~Leah [-- Attachment #1.2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --] [-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 184 bytes --] _______________________________________________ libreplanet-discuss mailing list libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2022-03-24 14:48 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 11+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2022-03-20 23:49 better terminology to promote freedom Leah Rowe via libreplanet-discuss 2022-03-20 23:58 ` Valentino Giudice 2022-03-21 0:06 ` Leah Rowe via libreplanet-discuss 2022-03-21 0:16 ` Aaron Wolf 2022-03-21 0:20 ` Aaron Wolf 2022-03-21 0:24 ` Yuchen Pei 2022-03-21 0:46 ` Leah Rowe via libreplanet-discuss 2022-03-22 18:36 ` Preston Miller Firestone via libreplanet-discuss 2022-03-24 2:29 ` Jean Louis 2022-03-21 5:55 ` Jean Louis 2022-03-22 11:09 ` Leah Rowe via libreplanet-discuss
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).