Fsf-friends

fsf-friends@gnu.org.in

3393 discussions

Free without ambiguity and overapplicability
by Ramanraj K 30 Nov '03

30 Nov '03

There is an animadversion that proprietary software is given away "free" and therefore, Free Software is ambigious. Let us see if there is any truth in this criticism. Since the literal use of the word "free" is involved, let us have a look at what "free" means. Upon the word "free", the OED says: ~ not in bondage to another, having personal rights, social and political liberty ~ inheriting citizen rights and liberties ~ member of fraternity for mutual help and brotherly feeling ~ unfettered in action, unimpeded ~ open to all comers ~ spontaneous, unforced, unearned, gratuitous, willing ~ voluntary, not concealing one's opinions, blunt ~ released from difficulty ~ no fees charged ~ make free, set at liberty If the word "free" is used to qualify software, then it would naturally and literally mean and include all the above meanings listed above. If the object qualified with "free" is not free in any sense of the word, then the overapplicability should be restricted, to convey the true qualities of the software without ambiguity. We rightly use "free" in Free Software scoring a clean 10 out of 10, whereas, the proprietary software companies use the word "free" incorrectly, inappropriately, ambigiously and with overapplicability, really scoring a poor 0 out of 10, meaning they cannot use the word "free" correctly or honestly and is only a misnomer. Let us closely examine the context in which the word "free" is used by the free software community and the proprietary software entities to qualify software. [0] No bondage to others: Free software is a collection of software like GNU/Linux or FreeBSD that is a full fledged system, for single or multiple users or processors. Every thing including the kernel (Linux, HURD, FreeBSD), shell (bash, sh, csh, tcsh), compiler (gcc), office suites (OpenOffice), browsers (Netscape and Mozilla), database servers (PostgreSQL etc), networking applications (apache, sendmail, including general scripting software like PHP, Perl, guile, elisp), graphics applications (gimp), and hundreds of other utilites (tar, bc, cat, less, more) required to serve our needs are available under the GPL or like Licence, with full source code, making it possible to freely share, copy, and modify software for our use. New tools and utilities are created by every new generation of developers, and in the same traditions the software is added with liberty. Free software if free for every user, and for every type of use, personal, commercial or governmental, without any restrictions. Any one can freely share and use Free Software without seeking permission from anyone else. Free means freedom, totally negating the restrictions imposed by proprietary software licenses. For example, a school could use Free Software and freely give copies of the software used to its teachers and pupils without restrictions. Governments could freely use and distribute free software in the welfare of its citizens. Now, proprietary software companies release just a trivial application like a browser free of price and claim to having released "free software". The word "free" here is a misnomer, because, to use this piece of proprietary software, the user should have paid and purchased other components - the kernel, shell, or other systems under a licence from the proprietor. The ingenuius proprietary software licence will carefully give a full working system free of price, without source code, to governments and to educational institutions, just to ensure that the citizens and their children will forced to use proprietary software, and ultimately buy and use their proprietary software in their homes and offices. In reality, the "free" proprietary software is not "free" but merely mis-branded as "free" solely for marketing purposes. [1] Inheriting citizen rights and liberties Free software is freely inherited by the whole global community and society. Every new generation will freely inherit a rich body of code produced by the free software community. With proprietary software, one should always be ready to purchase new licences at the drop of a hat. To keep the free software free for the community, developers who modify the free software source code and release to the public are required to release the modified free software under the same terms of the licence of the original software. The copyright holder of free software can always sue the author who modified the software, for not freely releasing the modifications. This is the only right the author of the software code reserves for himself, just to ensure that future versions of the free software remains free for the whole community. The spirit of the free software movement is all pervasive, and sharing is practically automatic and happily done with grace. [2] member of fraternity for mutual help and brotherly feeling Sharing is free with Free Software. Proprietary software licences restrict sharing, and further will even prosecute for sharing which is even worse. There is an air of fraternity, brotherhood and freedom in the free software community, which is simply unknown in the proprietary software world, where users are chained and tied with a licence that will not allow any sharing or modification. [3] unfettered in action: Free Software may be used freely for commercial, office, home, education, governmental or other purposes. There are no fetters on copying, sale, exhibition, trading or installation of Free Software. With most proprietary software, one has to spend a lot of time studying licence restrictions on using components and literally several practical actions required to use the software itself are fettered in one way or the other. The proprietary software licence may say that even the licenced user can use only one instance on any one computer at any given point of time making realistic practical use of the software cumbersome. [4] open to all comers: Free Software has promoted the principle of equality like never before, and all are welcome to the free software community. With proprietary software, all doors are closed to people who cannot afford to purchase the software. [5] spontaneous, unforced, unearned, gratuitous, willing: The whole free software community acts spontaneously and voluntarily to develop high quality software to add well deserved honour to their names, and willingly and gratuitously give away the software under the GPL or like Licence. These freedoms are not possible or imaginable with proprietary software. [6] voluntary, not concealing one's opinions, blunt Free software is used voluntarily, and enables users to express their opinions about the software plainly and fruitfully in a way promoting the interest of the entire community. If a user finds something amiss, he may set out to correct the fault on his without wasting another moment, and release his work to the public, happy to have been of help. [7] released from difficulty: The souce code for most free software is mostly written in ANSI C, and free software applications can be compiled with gcc using standard procedures. This gives great freedom to port software on to a number of platforms and wide range of hardware, to suit a variety of needs. Proprietary software companies do not release source code, and they cannot be compiled with this kind of freedom, and are often tied to a particular platform, or even worse, to a unique version of a particular operating system. [8] no fees charged Free Software is free of price, if downloaded from Internet, or shared between friends. The truth is that free software is more valuable than being merely available free of cost. Since further copying and trading is free, we can only say Price is Free plus profit if you can earn it. If the same free software is distributed through a "commercial package" the distributor gives the free software for a price greater than zero, which may be the cost of providing warranty cover and other distribution costs of CD/DVD media, printed manuals, packaging, shrink wraps, advertisement and tranportation costs, dealership margins, sometimes at a premium to those who can afford, and other business costs. All users know that the free software included in the commercial package is available at no cost elsewhere, and deliberately chooses to buy a commercial package to suit their convenience or to promote the free software. Some criticize that the cost of implementing and maintaining free software may be as high as proprietary software. This is for a short span of time when documentation and other forms of help have not yet evolved, mostly because free software developers spend most of the time developing the software, and find little time to write elementary manuals. But with time, excellent free online manuals are published, through which a user can learn without spending any money on purchasing documentation or training. One is free to learn through public mailing lists, and even public libraries. Proprietary software companies sometimes give away their software like soap samples, only to promote purchases, and cannot qualify to be free for all the above reasons. Even documentation for proprietary software cannot be shared or freely reproduced. [9] make free, set at liberty: Free Software makes software users free and promotes their liberty in several ways. Proprietary software can do only the opposite. Therefore, while we correctly and meaningfully use the word "free" in Free Software, proprietary software entities use the word "free" without any substantial meaning or content, with overwhelming ambiguity and overapplicability.

2 4

On The Internet Galaxy
by doxa＠sancharnet.in 30 Nov '03

30 Nov '03

Manuel Castell has published a book on The Internet Galaxy, where there are countless references on Free software and other related developments. Great Book from Oxford. CK Raju

1 0

Re: [Fsf-friends] Free without ambiguity and overapplicability
by Manilal K M 30 Nov '03

30 Nov '03

Hello everybody, Actually many words in english may have various different meanings in different context. This is bound to linguistics rather than software or GPL. So is the case with word 'free'. When it cames to software we can use as 'free as in freedom'. But we cannot stop the usage such as 'free with this pack'. because it's a common usage. and I agree with eiidp's view that GNU should focus on the 'GPL concept'. with regards Manilal ----- Original Message ----- From: eiidp <eiidp(a)md3.vsnl.net.in> Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 10:31:19 +0530 To: fsf-friends(a)mm.gnu.org.in Subject: Re: [Fsf-friends] Free without ambiguity and overapplicability > > > Freedom is the noun form of the adjective free. Freedom is derived from > > free. > > The reverse is the fact. And through this only a single meaning of the word > 'free' is evolved. And that same word 'free' is used for various other > purposes. > > > What is needed is curtailment of the abuse of the word "free" by > > proprietary software entities. > > There is no question of abuse, It is a question of common usage which may vary > spatially, sector-wise and cultural-wise. > > > The whole point is that there is little need to explain the correct and > > proper usage by the free software movement. When the words we use exactly > > fit and match our matter at hand, our joy doubles. > > To fit and match it exactly, the explanation should be accompanied. 'Joy' is > a state of mind. This can also be attained if one is prepared to accept > something else. > > The most valuable contribution made by GNU to the society is the concept of > GPL. The war on words contriutes little. > > Regards, > > Anil > > _______________________________________________ > Fsf-friends mailing list > Fsf-friends(a)mm.gnu.org.in > http://mm.gnu.org.in/mailman/listinfo/fsf-friends -- ______________________________________________ Check out the latest SMS services @ http://www.linuxmail.org This allows you to send and receive SMS through your mailbox. Powered by Outblaze

1 0

Hello
by Manilal K M 28 Nov '03

28 Nov '03

Hello everybody I am a new member in fsf-friends Manilal -- ______________________________________________ Check out the latest SMS services @ http://www.linuxmail.org This allows you to send and receive SMS through your mailbox. Powered by Outblaze

1 0

Legal Recourse
by doxa＠sancharnet.in 24 Nov '03

24 Nov '03

Arun, Since the "deal" involves a huge amount, I don't think press releases are enough. Those in power would do anything to get it on. Merely relying on "Opposition" to take up the case also would result in a lost case. When LDF took up the project with M$, it was MM Hassan who voiced against the move from the opposition benches. Now when MM Hassan's team is in power, Achuthanandan is trying to make noices. This cycle would continue. The case would have been different if the civil servants played a sensible role. They too are bothered about losing out on their commission. So why would this nexus try to shed all inhibitions, glory and money to cry for the common man? That would never happen. I think we are now strong enough to plan a legal engagement. CK Raju

1 0

[COMMERCIAL] GNU/Linux CDs available in Goa...
by Frederick Noronha (FN) 23 Nov '03

23 Nov '03

=> Following is a comprehensive listing of the GNU/linux software available => for sharing.. => To place an order for your personal copy and for further info, pls => contact: Aniket Navelkar : aniket <at> gmx.net => Cost of the media Rs 30/- only per CD. Payment mode via Cash, Demand Draft or Money Order. Money has to be paid in advance & the order has to be confirmed via email only. Demand Draft in favor of: Aniket Navelkar, c/o Jegu Senai Navelkar, Near Post Office, Assolna Salcete, GOA - INDIA +---------------------------------------------------------------- | Software | Version | No of CD's | |-------------------------------+------------+------------------+ | RedHat | 6.2 | 1 | |-------------------------------+------------+------------------+ | RedHat | 9.0 | 3 | |-------------------------------+------------+------------------+ | Debian Woody | 3.0 | 7 | |-------------------------------+------------+------------------+ | Mandrake | 7.2 | 1 | |-------------------------------+------------+------------------+ | Mandrake | 8.2 | 1 | |-------------------------------+------------+------------------+ | Mandrake | 9.1 | 3 | |-------------------------------+------------+------------------+ | Knoppix | 3.2 | 1 | |-------------------------------+------------+------------------+ | Knoppix | 3.3 | 1 | |-------------------------------+------------+------------------+ | ELX Powerdesk | 1.0 | 1 | |-------------------------------+------------+------------------+ | ELX Powerdesk | 2.0 | 2 | |-------------------------------+------------+------------------+ | GNU Win | 2.1 | 1 | |-------------------------------+------------+------------------+ | Linux in a Teaspoon | | 1 | |-------------------------------+------------+------------------+ | Free BSD | 5.0 | | |-------------------------------+------------+------------------+ | Lindows OS | 4.0.3 | 1 | |-------------------------------+------------+------------------+ | Lindows OS [bootable] | 4.0.4 | 1 | |-------------------------------+------------+------------------+ | Server Optimised Linux [SOL] | | 1 | |-------------------------------+------------+------------------+ | Dynebolic | 1.03a3 | 1 | |-------------------------------+------------+------------------+ | The Open CD | | 1 | |-------------------------------+------------+------------------+ | Free Educ | | 1 | |-------------------------------+------------+------------------+ | SUSE LiveEval | 8.1 | 1 | |-------------------------------+------------+------------------+ | Gnoppix | 0.5-3 | 1 | |-------------------------------+------------+------------------+ | Slackware | 9.0 | 1 | |-------------------------------+------------+------------------+ | RockLinux | 2.0 | 2 | |-------------------------------+------------+------------------+ | Connectiva | 9.0 | 4 | |-------------------------------+------------+------------------+ | ArchLinux | 0.5 | 1 | |-------------------------------+------------+------------------+ | ArkLinux | | 3 | |-------------------------------+------------+------------------+ | GSCP RedHat | v10 | 1 | |-------------------------------+------------+------------------+ | | | | +---------------------------------------------------------------- => Latest distributions will be added as & when they become available to => us.

1 0

[Fsf-friends] "The free software option" by C. Rammanohar Reddy in "The Hindu"
by Ramanraj K 22 Nov '03

22 Nov '03

"The Hindu" newspaper has published in its issue dated 22nd November, 2003, at page 10, an article titled "The free software option" by C. Rammanohar Reddy This is also available online at: http://www.hindu.com/2003/11/22/stories/2003112200721000.htm

1 0

For the records: OSI forking
by Ramanraj K 21 Nov '03

21 Nov '03

The free software movement forked in 1998 with the open source initiative labelling free software as "open source". We have seen why "open source" is superficial and why it cannot distinguish itself from proprietary software. If the OSI forks again, and continues its "open source" line for businesses, but joins the main stream "free software" movement in actions connected with the law, it would be in the best interests of both the movements and the community. Hence I sent a mail to Mr. Eric Raymond of the OSI. But my mail was rejected as follows: >Your message cannot be delivered to the following recipients: > > Recipient address: esr(a)thyrsus.com > Reason: Server rejected MAIL FROM address. > Diagnostic code: smtp;550 5.0.0 <ramanraj(a)md4.vsnl.net.in>... net.in blocked" Then I sent the contents to osi(a)opensource.org, and the replies revealed that they have also blocked reasoning, which is far worse. Mr. Russell Nelson of the OSI fairly wrote: >Please accept that we'll call it open source, and you'll call it free >software, and that we both mean the same thing. This however missed the concern how the law should call it. Therefore, I replied inviting the attention of Mr. Russell Nelson to this specific issue, which was replied as follows: >Microsoft gives away free software. >... "free software" is inherently confusing. Why do you think >RMS always has to give his free speech/beer footnote? Why do you >think proprietary software companies give away free software? Because >they're our friends? I don't think so. >The solution to all of this nonsense is to establish a certification >mark, which is what we've done. >I don't want to continue this discussion. A "certification mark" assumes discerning users, who might very well distinguish directly between "free software" and "proprietary software", without the aid of a third party certification. Law and software thrive upon building through reasoning, with an open mind, anticipating future scrutiny. Since Mr. Russell Nelson closed the discussion, we are free to ignore the fork that would meet its nemesis on its own. --

1 0

[Fsf-friends] Re: Pitching free software directly before UN and other govt. circles
by Ramanraj K 20 Nov '03

20 Nov '03

Russell Nelson wrote: >Ramanraj K writes: > > understand that both are one and the same to us, from the point of view > > of the copyright law, the expression "free software" makes it plain that > > copying, sale, exhibition, installation, modification, redistribution, > > and trading are "free" with "free software" but these rights are > > "restricted to/by proprietor" in the case of proprietary software. > >Microsoft gives away free software. > > > The availability of source code, price, quality of software, > > development model etc. are qualites that cannot distinguish or > > differentiate our software from proprietary software. It would be > > in the best interests of our community to promote "free software" > > terminology in govt. circles to maintain clarity avoiding needless > > confusion. Hence this request. > >Sorry, but "free software" is inherently confusing. Why do you think >RMS always has to give his free speech/beer footnote? Why do you >think proprietary software companies give away free software? Because >they're our friends? I don't think so. > >The solution to all of this nonsense is to establish a certification >mark, which is what we've done. > >I don't want to continue this discussion. > > > Time alone can bring home the truth.

1 0

[Fsf-friends] Re: Pitching free software directly before UN and other govt. circles
by Ramanraj K 20 Nov '03

20 Nov '03

Russell Nelson wrote: >Ramanraj K writes: > > Would you consider pitching "free software" directly before the UN and > > other government circles? > >Probably not. You're re-opening a battle we don't want to fight. >Please accept that we'll call it open source, and you'll call it free >software, and that we both mean the same thing. > > > Dear Mr. Russell Nelson, You may market "free software" as "open source" to the business community, highlighting one of the basic inherent qualities of free software. The issue is if you would consider pitching "free software" directly as "free software" before the law, to clearly distinguish free software from proprietary software. Please do leisurely read the postings referred. Please do not view this as a fight or battle, between the movements, for our real enemy is proprietary software. Though I understand that both are one and the same to us, from the point of view of the copyright law, the expression "free software" makes it plain that copying, sale, exhibition, installation, modification, redistribution, and trading are "free" with "free software" but these rights are "restricted to/by proprietor" in the case of proprietary software. The availability of source code, price, quality of software, development model etc. are qualites that cannot distinguish or differentiate our software from proprietary software. It would be in the best interests of our community to promote "free software" terminology in govt. circles to maintain clarity avoiding needless confusion. Hence this request. Thanking you, Regards, K. Ramanraj.

1 0

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

Fsf-friends