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.
The meaning of any word is evolved through its usage. As it is used by different sections of the society, It will be having different meanings, it will be conveying different messages.
Words like 'Free' which is having broad spectrum of usage will defenitely raise ambiguity. Level of ambiguity varies with culture and location in which it is used.
Here question is whether the adjective 'free' is correctley represent 'freedom'. Or whether it is more suitable for something else.
Richard Stallman, had made it very clear, that FSF and GNU consider ''free' as most suitable adjective for 'freedom' in English. He also stated that it is not possible to change the usage 'Free Software' as it is propogated by FSF and GNU for a long time now.
These arguments are acceptable. Now a days, due to the intervention of these organisations in software sector, 'free' as an adjective to represent 'freedom of user' is widely accepted.
However to convey it properly, the usage 'Free Software' should be accompany with an explanation for that usage. There still remains a chance for languages other than English to use a more suitable adjective for freedom.
However this is not the case with other sectors of the society. It should be realised that how much it worth the effort to project a single meaning of the word 'free' from a broad spectrum of meanings attributed to it by the whole human society. After all, the messages conveyed does matter, not the words used.
Regards,
Anil
whether free correctly represents freedom
To complete the literal analysis of "free", we may look into the meaning of "freedom" also.
Freedom is the noun form of the adjective free. Freedom is derived from free.
Freedom, originally meant free, exempt from, not in bondage, noble, and joyful. The OED gives "freedom" the sense of personal liberty, non-slavery, civil liberty, liberty of action, right to do, and unrestricted use.
Through free software, we have the freedom to make unrestricted use of software. Through this freedom, it is possible to enjoy our other freedoms with less effort.
Richard Stallman, had made it very clear, that FSF and GNU consider ''free' as most suitable adjective for 'freedom' in English. He also stated that it is not possible to change the usage 'Free Software' as it is propogated by FSF and GNU for a long time now.
These arguments are acceptable.
Of course, without any doubt.
However to convey it properly, the usage 'Free Software' should be accompany with an explanation for that usage.
The whole point is that there is little need to explain the correct and proper usage by the free software movement. What is needed is curtailment of the abuse of the word "free" by proprietary software entities.
After all, the messages conveyed does matter, not the words used.
When the words we use exactly fit and match our matter at hand, our joy doubles.
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
First, a note on why "Free without ambiguity and overapplicability" was written.
When the OSI was recently requested if it could pitch "free software" directly before the UN and other government circles, Mr. Russel Nelson of the OSI 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.
[... a proprietary software company...] gives away free software.
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.
Had the reply been positive, all this would be superfluous.
A literal study of the expression "free software" shows that we use the expression correctly, without any "inherent confusion". "Free Software" on it own, makes clear literal sense and the free speech/beer example is a useful analogy. The "inherent confusion" arises and lies in proprietary software companies saying they are giving away free software, without setting the software totally free without restrictions. Proprietary software companies may give away free cd's, free dvd's, or free packs but if they say they are giving away free software, then it can be so only when they give their software under the GPL or like free license without proprietary restrictions, and not otherwise, for reasons already seen.
Ramanraj wrote:
/ Freedom is the noun form of the adjective free. Freedom is derived from
/>>/ free. />
Anil worte: 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.
Let me clarify both, the grammar and the derivation.
Software is a noun. We use the adjective "free" to qualify the software produced and used by the free software community. We have Freedom in using free software, and here "Freedom" is a noun.
The OED says: OE freodom (FREE(1), -DOM) [meaning in Old English, FREE(1) is a reference to the root word free]
The Words of Wonder web site has the following to say about the the word Freedom: <quote>
Sources differ on its origin, or rather from which language. Most indicate that /freedom /comes from O.E. /fr//e-odo-m/, later as M.E./ fr//e-do-m/. Reputedly used by Chaucer in a sense of politeness, good breeding. Of course, it is the noun form stemming from the adjective/ free/, which comes from M.E./ fre- /from O.E. /fre-o/ "free, exempt from, not in bondage;" also "noble, joyful," from P.Gmc. /frijaz/; from PIE /prijos/ "dear, beloved." The verb is from O.E. /fre-on, fre-ogan/ "to free, love."
.... .... ....
The modern day definition of /freedom/ has many variants, many of which are most applicable to our daily on-the-TV-and-in-your-face meaning: state of being free; easy, unconstrained action; and most relevant to the discussion: free permission to use something belonging to another.
</quote>
Though we do take freedom for granted, it is seldom free, and won only after a long and tough fight.
-
eiidp -
Ramanraj K