Re: Free vs. Open SW (was: Richard Stallman Meets with President of India)

["Seth Johnson" <seth.johnson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

LOL.

Yep, that's right.

I always note the fact whenever the "open source" terminology is being 
used, for anything related to the principles represented and conveyed 
best by the term "free software."

:-)

Seth

-----Original Message-----
From: Max.Hyre@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 11:21:40 -0500
Subject: Free vs. Open SW (was:  Richard Stallman Meets with President 
of  India)

>    Dear DCers:
> 
>    In his message to the list yesterday, Seth Johnson passed
> along a report of Richard Stallman's visit to India and
> meeting with government officials there. In his preface,
> Mr. Johnson observed:
> 
> > (One can detect an odd terminological distinction between 
> > free and open that appears to be operative within this
> > article, and one line seems to find Stallman's philosophy
> > exhibited in the no-cost distribution of his biography, but
> > this is exciting and promising news. ....)
> 
> 
>    Mr. Johnson's reference to ``an odd terminological
> distinction between free and open'' is a hair off the mark.
> The distinction is deeply social (philosophical?).
> 
>    The `Open Software' movement sees free software as
> pragmatic, simply an improvement in software development
> methods:  if a proprietary program is better at what you
> want done, use it.
> 
>    The `Free Software' movement (the elder of the two by some
> fifteen years) is a social movement working for the freedom
> of software's *users*---Free Software is a means to that end.
> A proprietary program with more functionality should never
> be accepted, but rather taken as a spur to write, or pay to
> have written, a better Free alternative.  This stand is
> driven by the Free Software Foundation (http://www.fsf.org/),
> founded by Dr. Stallman in 1984.
> 
>    For a fuller exposition, see Dr. Stallman's essay _Why
> ``Free Software'' is better than ``Open Source''_ at
> http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.html.
> I fear Dr. Stallman will be unhappy with the article's lumping
> the two together, and with the implication that he'd ever
> try to advance Open Source's cause as such.  If you believe
> (as I do) that the end envisioned by the RIAA and MPAA is to
> force upon the world computers which will *only* run DRM
> (Digital Restrictions Managed) music, video, &c., he's
> absolutely right.  Thus, the FSF takes its stand against
> copyright extensions such as the Sonny Bono act and the
> DMCA---the mechanisms needed to enforce such rigid laws are
> precisely those which can make Free Software impossible.
> 
>    Can you tell that this is a campaign for the Greater
> Good?  :-)  There are many other thoughtful essays at the
> same location, http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/, on every
> aspect of the need for computing freedom.
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
>                          Best wishes,
> 
>                                   Max Hyre