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

Alvin Starr alvin at netvel.net
Thu Jul 13 10:47:06 EDT 2017


Hmmmm.

True cloud services are an interesting quirk.


On 07/13/2017 10:26 AM, Evan Leibovitch via talk wrote:
> 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 
> <mailto: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
>     <mailto:talk at gtalug.org>> wrote:
>     > > I found this article interesting and useful
>     > >
>     <https://opensource.com/business/16/11/open-source-not-free-software
>     <https://opensource.com/business/16/11/open-source-not-free-software>>
>     > > This guy disagrees:
>     > > <https://meshedinsights.com/2017/06/07/free-vs-open/
>     <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 <mailto:talk at gtalug.org>
>     https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk
>     <https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk>
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Evan Leibovitch
> Toronto, Canada
>
>     Em: evan at telly dot org
>     Sk: evanleibovitch
>     Tw: el56
>
>
>
> ---
> Talk Mailing List
> talk at gtalug.org
> https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk

-- 
Alvin Starr                   ||   land:  (905)513-7688
Netvel Inc.                   ||   Cell:  (416)806-0133
alvin at netvel.net              ||

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://gtalug.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20170713/64d87bff/attachment.html>


More information about the talk mailing list