[GTALUG] "'Opens source' is not 'free software'"

[Evan Leibovitch]

After decades with no apparent change in arguments or hope for resolution,
I find  the whole debate elitist and entertainingly stagnant. Reminds me of
candy <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w0QpPNcT-J4> advertisements
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DJLDF6qZUX0>.

As is common in religious debates, the two sides tend to come from
different mindsets and don't even get what the other is saying. I find the
two approaches complementary rather than in opposition.

Want to do it for the improvement of society? Great.
Want to do it to improve efficiency, reduce bugs and involve a broader
talent pool? Also great.
Just do it. By and large the paths are the same.

What has more-recently astounded me about the binary nature of the debate
is that it has ignored a third aspect that challenges the other two --
cloud-based software. The GPL does not require you to release your modified
source if you don't redistribute your code at all. A cloud service thus can
use software under even the most "viral" licenses without worry because the
result is only actually executed on computers wholly under its control.

While people still argue about closed MS-Word versus open LibreOffice, they
ignore Google Docs -- Is that open or closed? Can its developers
incorporate GPL software while wholly circumventing the FSF's social goals?
This paradigm needs to be addressed but IMO has been largely ignored for an
assortment of reasons.

- Evan


On 13 July 2017 at 09:37, Lennart Sorensen via talk <talk at gtalug.org> wrote:

> On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 05:44:51AM +0200, ac via talk wrote:
> > On Tue, 11 Jul 2017 17:09:55 -0400 (EDT)
> > "D. Hugh Redelmeier via talk" <talk at gtalug.org> wrote:
> > > I found this article interesting and useful
> > > <https://opensource.com/business/16/11/open-source-not-free-software>
> > > This guy disagrees:
> > > <https://meshedinsights.com/2017/06/07/free-vs-open/>
> >
> > imho, it is semantics / point of view..
> >
> > my own pov (ymmv): Truly free and truly open is everything BSD licensed
> > (including my own BSD released code/projects/software) my GPL etc
> > licensed software is open, and free if you are only a user, but not so
> > much free if you are a dev, etc. :)
>
> The goal of GPL is the freedom of the source code, and hence the freedom
> of future users of the source code.  It is not the freedom of someone
> to decide to deny others the same freedom, unlike the BSD license where
> the receiver is the one that is most free to do what they want.  So yes
> the GPL gives each user less freedom in the interest of giving all users
> that same level of freedom in using the code.
>
> Different goal.
>
> --
> Len Sorensen
> ---
> Talk Mailing List
> talk at gtalug.org
> https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk
>



-- 
Evan Leibovitch
Toronto, Canada

Em: evan at telly dot org
Sk: evanleibovitch
Tw: el56
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://gtalug.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20170713/f1ffc10b/attachment.html>