[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
www/philosophy words-to-avoid.html
|
From: |
Yavor Doganov |
|
Subject: |
www/philosophy words-to-avoid.html |
|
Date: |
Thu, 17 May 2007 21:04:56 +0000 |
CVSROOT: /web/www
Module name: www
Changes by: Yavor Doganov <yavor> 07/05/17 21:04:56
Modified files:
philosophy : words-to-avoid.html
Log message:
* Moved the closing </div> where it belongs.
* Replaced 360 occurrences of double quotes.
* Use links relative to the web server root.
* Link to not-ipr.html instead of .xhtml.
* Fixed translations list, added link to the Romanian one.
CVSWeb URLs:
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.75&r2=1.76
Patches:
Index: words-to-avoid.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html,v
retrieving revision 1.75
retrieving revision 1.76
diff -u -b -r1.75 -r1.76
--- words-to-avoid.html 13 May 2007 20:01:21 -0000 1.75
+++ words-to-avoid.html 17 May 2007 21:04:33 -0000 1.76
@@ -19,93 +19,95 @@
<p>
<a href="/philosophy/philosophy.html">Other Texts to Read</a>
-| "<a href="words-to-avoid.html#BSD-style"
- name="TOCBSD-style">BSD-style</a>"
-| "<a href="words-to-avoid.html#Closed"
- name="TOCClosed">Closed</a>"
-| "<a href="words-to-avoid.html#Commercial"
- name="TOCCommercial">Commercial</a>"
-| "<a href="words-to-avoid.html#Consumer"
- name="TOCConsumer">Consumer</a>"
-| "<a href="words-to-avoid.html#Content"
- name="TOCContent">Content</a>"
-| "<a href="words-to-avoid.html#Creator"
- name="TOCCreator">Creator</a>"
-| "<a href="words-to-avoid.html#DigitalRightsManagement"
- name="TOCDigitalRightsManagement">Digital Rights Management</a>"
-| "<a href="words-to-avoid.html#Ecosystem"
- name="TOCEcosystem">Ecosystem</a>"
-| "<a href="words-to-avoid.html#ForFree"
- name="TOCForFree">For free</a>"
-| "<a href="words-to-avoid.html#FreelyAvailable"
- name="TOCFreelyAvailable">Freely available</a>"
-| "<a href="words-to-avoid.html#Freeware"
- name="TOCFreeware">Freeware</a>"
-| "<a href="words-to-avoid.html#GiveAwaySoftware"
- name="TOCGiveAwaySoftware">Give away software</a>"
-| "<a href="words-to-avoid.html#Hacker"
- name="TOCHacker">Hacker</a>"
-| "<a href="words-to-avoid.html#IntellectualProperty"
- name="TOCIntellectualProperty">Intellectual property</a>"
-| "<a href="words-to-avoid.html#LAMP"
- name="TOCLAMP">LAMP system</a>"
-| "<a href="words-to-avoid.html#Linux"
- name="TOCLinux">Linux system</a>"
-| "<a href="words-to-avoid.html#Market"
- name="TOCMarket">Market</a>"
-| "<a href="words-to-avoid.html#MP3Player"
- name="TOCMarket">MP3 player</a>"
-| "<a href="words-to-avoid.html#Open"
- name="TOCOpen">Open</a>"
-| "<a href="words-to-avoid.html#PC"
- name="TOCPC">PC</a>"
-| "<a href="words-to-avoid.html#Piracy"
- name="TOCPiracy">Piracy</a>"
-| "<a href="words-to-avoid.html#Protection"
- name="TOCProtection">Protection</a>"
-| "<a href="words-to-avoid.html#RAND"
- name="TOCRAND">RAND</a>"
-| "<a href="words-to-avoid.html#SellSoftware"
- name="TOCSellSoftware">Sell software</a>"
-| "<a href="words-to-avoid.html#SoftwareIndustry"
- name="TOCSoftwareIndustry">Software Industry</a>"
-| "<a href="words-to-avoid.html#Theft"
- name="TOCTheft">Theft</a>"
-| "<a href="words-to-avoid.html#TrustedComputing"
- name="TOCTrustedComputing">Trusted Computing</a>"
-| "<a href="words-to-avoid.html#Vendor"
- name="TOCVendor">Vendor</a>"
+| “<a href="words-to-avoid.html#BSD-style"
+ name="TOCBSD-style">BSD-style</a>”
+| “<a href="words-to-avoid.html#Closed"
+ name="TOCClosed">Closed</a>”
+| “<a href="words-to-avoid.html#Commercial"
+ name="TOCCommercial">Commercial</a>”
+| “<a href="words-to-avoid.html#Consumer"
+ name="TOCConsumer">Consumer</a>”
+| “<a href="words-to-avoid.html#Content"
+ name="TOCContent">Content</a>”
+| “<a href="words-to-avoid.html#Creator"
+ name="TOCCreator">Creator</a>”
+| “<a href="words-to-avoid.html#DigitalRightsManagement"
+ name="TOCDigitalRightsManagement">Digital Rights Management</a>”
+| “<a href="words-to-avoid.html#Ecosystem"
+ name="TOCEcosystem">Ecosystem</a>”
+| “<a href="words-to-avoid.html#ForFree"
+ name="TOCForFree">For free</a>”
+| “<a href="words-to-avoid.html#FreelyAvailable"
+ name="TOCFreelyAvailable">Freely available</a>”
+| “<a href="words-to-avoid.html#Freeware"
+ name="TOCFreeware">Freeware</a>”
+| “<a href="words-to-avoid.html#GiveAwaySoftware"
+ name="TOCGiveAwaySoftware">Give away software</a>”
+| “<a href="words-to-avoid.html#Hacker"
+ name="TOCHacker">Hacker</a>”
+| “<a href="words-to-avoid.html#IntellectualProperty"
+ name="TOCIntellectualProperty">Intellectual property</a>”
+| “<a href="words-to-avoid.html#LAMP"
+ name="TOCLAMP">LAMP system</a>”
+| “<a href="words-to-avoid.html#Linux"
+ name="TOCLinux">Linux system</a>”
+| “<a href="words-to-avoid.html#Market"
+ name="TOCMarket">Market</a>”
+| “<a href="words-to-avoid.html#MP3Player"
+ name="TOCMarket">MP3 player</a>”
+| “<a href="words-to-avoid.html#Open"
+ name="TOCOpen">Open</a>”
+| “<a href="words-to-avoid.html#PC"
+ name="TOCPC">PC</a>”
+| “<a href="words-to-avoid.html#Piracy"
+ name="TOCPiracy">Piracy</a>”
+| “<a href="words-to-avoid.html#Protection"
+ name="TOCProtection">Protection</a>”
+| “<a href="words-to-avoid.html#RAND"
+ name="TOCRAND">RAND</a>”
+| “<a href="words-to-avoid.html#SellSoftware"
+ name="TOCSellSoftware">Sell software</a>”
+| “<a href="words-to-avoid.html#SoftwareIndustry"
+ name="TOCSoftwareIndustry">Software Industry</a>”
+| “<a href="words-to-avoid.html#Theft"
+ name="TOCTheft">Theft</a>”
+| “<a href="words-to-avoid.html#TrustedComputing"
+ name="TOCTrustedComputing">Trusted Computing</a>”
+| “<a href="words-to-avoid.html#Vendor"
+ name="TOCVendor">Vendor</a>”
</p>
-<h4 id="BSD-style">"BSD-style"</h4>
+<h4 id="BSD-style">“BSD-style”</h4>
<p>
-The expression "BSD-style license" leads to confusion because it
+The expression “BSD-style license” leads to confusion because it
<a href="/philosophy/bsd.html">lumps together licenses that have
important differences</a>. For instance, the original BSD license
with the advertising clause is incompatible with the GNU GPL, but the
revised BSD license is compatible with the GPL.</p>
<p>
-To avoid confusion, it is best to name <a href="/licenses/license-list.html">
-the specific license in question</a> and avoid the vague term "BSD-style."</p>
+To avoid confusion, it is best to
+name <a href="/licenses/license-list.html"> the specific license in
+question</a> and avoid the vague term “BSD-style.”</p>
-<h4 id="Closed">"Closed"</h4>
+<h4 id="Closed">“Closed”</h4>
<p>
-Describing non-free software as "closed" clearly refers to the term
-"open source". In the Free Software Movement,
+Describing non-free software as “closed” clearly refers to
+the term “open source”. In the Free Software Movement,
<a href="/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.html"> we want to avoid
being confused with the more recent Open Source Movement</a>, so we
are careful to avoid usage that would encourage people to lump us in
with them. Therefore, we avoid describing non-free software as
-"closed". We call it "non-free" or
-<a href="http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/categories.html#ProprietarySoftware";>
-"proprietary"</a>.</p>
+“closed”. We call it “non-free” or
+<a href="/philosophy/categories.html#ProprietarySoftware">
+“proprietary”</a>.</p>
-<h4 id="Commercial">"Commercial"</h4>
+<h4 id="Commercial">“Commercial”</h4>
<p>
-Please don't use "commercial" as a synonym for "non-free."
-That confuses two entirely different issues.</p>
+Please don't use “commercial” as a synonym for
+“non-free.” That confuses two entirely different
+issues.</p>
<p>
A program is commercial if it is developed as a business activity. A
commercial program can be free or non-free, depending on its license.
@@ -121,139 +123,152 @@
the 90s, free commercial software started to appear.</p>
<p>
Free commercial software is a contribution to our community, so we
-should encourage it. But people who think that "commercial" means
-"non-free" will tend to think that the "free commercial"
-combination is self-contradictory, and dismiss the possibility. Let's
-be careful not to use the word "commercial" in that way.</p>
+should encourage it. But people who think that
+“commercial” means “non-free” will tend to
+think that the “free commercial” combination is
+self-contradictory, and dismiss the possibility. Let's be careful not
+to use the word “commercial” in that way.</p>
-<h4 id="Consumer">"Consumer"</h4>
+<h4 id="Consumer">“Consumer”</h4>
<p>
-The term "consumer", when used to refer to computer users,
+The term “consumer”, when used to refer to computer users,
carries unfortunate assumptions.</p>
<p>
-Economic theory uses the terms "producer" and "consumer". In that
-context these words are appropriate. But describing the users of
-software as "consumers" presumes a narrow role for them. It treats
-them like cattle that passively graze on what others make available to
-them.</p>
-<p>
-This kind of thinking leads to travesties like the CBDTPA "Consumer
-Broadband and Digital Television Promotion Act" which would require
-copying restriction facilities in every digital device. If all
-the users do is "consume", then why should they mind?</p>
-<p>
-The narrow economic vision of users as "consumers" tends to go hand in
-hand with the idea that published works are "content".</p>
+Economic theory uses the terms “producer” and
+“consumer”. In that context these words are appropriate.
+But describing the users of software as “consumers”
+presumes a narrow role for them. It treats them like cattle that
+passively graze on what others make available to them.</p>
+<p>
+This kind of thinking leads to travesties like the CBDTPA
+“Consumer Broadband and Digital Television Promotion Act”
+which would require copying restriction facilities in every digital
+device. If all the users do is “consume”, then why should
+they mind?</p>
+<p>
+The narrow economic vision of users as “consumers” tends
+to go hand in hand with the idea that published works are
+“content”.</p>
<p>
To describe people who are not limited to passive consumption on their
-computers, we suggest terms such as "individuals" and "citizens".</p>
+computers, we suggest terms such as “individuals” and
+“citizens”.</p>
-<h4 id="Content">"Content"</h4>
+<h4 id="Content">“Content”</h4>
<p>
If you want to describe a feeling of comfort and satisfaction, by all
-means say you are "content", but using it as a noun to describe
-written and other works of authorship is worth avoiding. That usage
-adopts a specific attitude towards those works: that they are an
-interchangeable commodity whose purpose is to fill a box and make
-money. In effect, it treats the works themselves with disrespect.</p>
+means say you are “content”, but using it as a noun to
+describe written and other works of authorship is worth avoiding.
+That usage adopts a specific attitude towards those works: that they
+are an interchangeable commodity whose purpose is to fill a box and
+make money. In effect, it treats the works themselves with
+disrespect.</p>
<p>
Those who use this term are often the publishers that push for
-increased copyright power in the name of the authors ("creators", as
-they say) of the works. The term "content" reveals what they really
-feel.</p>
-<p>
-The term "content management" takes the prize for vacuity. Neither
-word has any specific meaning; "content" means "some sort of
-information", and "management" in this context means "doing something
-with it". So a "content management system" is a system for doing
+increased copyright power in the name of the authors
+(“creators”, as they say) of the works. The term
+“content” reveals what they really feel.</p>
+<p>
+The term “content management” takes the prize for vacuity.
+Neither word has any specific meaning; “content” means
+“some sort of information”, and “management”
+in this context means “doing something with it”. So a
+“content management system” is a system for doing
something to some sort of information. In most cases, that term
really refers to a system for updating a website. For that, we
-recommend the term "website revision system" (WRS).</p>
+recommend the term “website revision system” (WRS).</p>
<p>
-However, as long as other people use the term "content provider",
-political dissidents can well call themselves "malcontent
-providers".</p>
+However, as long as other people use the term “content
+provider”, political dissidents can well call themselves
+“malcontent providers”.</p>
-<h4 id="Creator">"Creator"</h4>
+<h4 id="Creator">“Creator”</h4>
<p>
-The term "creator" as applied to authors implicitly compares them to
-a deity ("the creator"). The term is used by publishers to elevate
-the authors' moral stature above that of ordinary people, to justify
-increased copyright power that the publishers can exercise in the name
-of the authors. We recommend saying "author" instead. However, in
-many cases "copyright holder" is what you really mean.</p>
+The term “creator” as applied to authors implicitly
+compares them to a deity (“the creator”). The term is
+used by publishers to elevate the authors' moral stature above that of
+ordinary people, to justify increased copyright power that the
+publishers can exercise in the name of the authors. We recommend
+saying “author” instead. However, in many cases
+“copyright holder” is what you really mean.</p>
-<h4 id="DigitalRightsManagement">"Digital Rights Management"</h4>
+<h4 id="DigitalRightsManagement">“Digital Rights Management”</h4>
<p>
-"Digital Rights Management" software is actually designed to impose
-restrictions on computer users. The use of the word "rights" in
-this term is propaganda, designed to lead you unawares into seeing
-the issue from the viewpoint of the few that impose the restrictions,
-while ignoring that of the many on whom the restrictions are imposed.</p>
+“Digital Rights Management” software is actually designed
+to impose restrictions on computer users. The use of the word
+“rights” in this term is propaganda, designed to lead you
+unawares into seeing the issue from the viewpoint of the few that
+impose the restrictions, while ignoring that of the many on whom the
+restrictions are imposed.</p>
<p>
-Good alternatives include "Digital Restrictions Management", "Digital
-Restrictions Malware", and "handcuffware".</p>
+Good alternatives include “Digital Restrictions
+Management”, “Digital Restrictions Malware”, and
+“handcuffware”.</p>
-<h4 id="Ecosystem">"Ecosystem"</h4>
+<h4 id="Ecosystem">“Ecosystem”</h4>
<p>
It is a mistake to describe our community (or any community) as an
-"ecosystem", because that word implies the absence of (1) intension
-and (2) ethics. In an ecosystem, species evolve according to their
-fitness. If something is weak, it goes extinct, and that's neither
-right nor wrong. The term "ecosystem" implicitly suggests a passive
-attitude: "Don't ask how things <em>should</em> be, just watch what
-happens to them".</p>
+“ecosystem”, because that word implies the absence of (1)
+intension and (2) ethics. In an ecosystem, species evolve according
+to their fitness. If something is weak, it goes extinct, and that's
+neither right nor wrong. The term “ecosystem” implicitly
+suggests a passive attitude: “Don't ask how
+things <em>should</em> be, just watch what happens to them”.</p>
<p>
By contrast, beings that have ethical responsibility can decide to
-preserve something that, on its own, would tend to vanish—such as
-civil society, democracy, human rights, peace, public health, … or
-computer users' freedom.
+preserve something that, on its own, would tend to vanish—such
+as civil society, democracy, human rights, peace, public health,
+… or computer users' freedom.
</p>
-<h4 id="ForFree">"For free"</h4>
+<h4 id="ForFree">“For free”</h4>
<p>
If you want to say that a program is free software, please don't say
-that it is available "for free." That term specifically means "for
-zero price." Free software is a matter of freedom, not price.</p>
-<p>
-Free software copies are often available for free—for example, by
-downloading via FTP. But free software copies are also available for
-a price on CD-ROMs; meanwhile, proprietary software copies are
+that it is available “for free.” That term specifically
+means “for zero price.” Free software is a matter of
+freedom, not price.</p>
+<p>
+Free software copies are often available for free—for example,
+by downloading via FTP. But free software copies are also available
+for a price on CD-ROMs; meanwhile, proprietary software copies are
occasionally available for free in promotions, and some proprietary
packages are normally available at no charge to certain users.</p>
<p>
-To avoid confusion, you can say that the program is available "as
-free software."</p>
+To avoid confusion, you can say that the program is available
+“as free software.”</p>
-<h4 id="FreelyAvailable">"Freely Available"</h4>
+<h4 id="FreelyAvailable">“Freely Available”</h4>
<p>
-Don't use "freely available" as a synonym for "free software." They
-are not equivalent. "Freely available" means that anyone can easily
-get a copy. "Free software" is defined in terms of the freedom of
-users that have a copy. These are answers to different questions.
+Don't use “freely available” as a synonym for “free
+software.” They are not equivalent. “Freely
+available” means that anyone can easily get a copy. “Free
+software” is defined in terms of the freedom of users that have
+a copy. These are answers to different questions.
</p>
-<h4 id="Freeware">"Freeware"</h4>
+<h4 id="Freeware">“Freeware”</h4>
<p>
-Please don't use the term "freeware" as a synonym for "free software."
-The term "freeware" was used often in the 1980s for programs
-released only as executables, with source code not available.
-Today it has no particular agreed-on definition.</p>
+Please don't use the term “freeware” as a synonym for
+“free software.” The term “freeware” was used
+often in the 1980s for programs released only as executables, with
+source code not available. Today it has no particular agreed-on
+definition.</p>
<p>
Also, if you use other languages than English, please try to avoid
-borrowing English terms such as "free software" or "freeware."
-It is better to translate the term "free software" into
+borrowing English terms such as “free software” or
+“freeware.” It is better to translate the term “free
+software” into
<a href="/philosophy/fs-translations.html">your language</a>.</p>
<p>
@@ -265,39 +280,43 @@
it says, they will really understand what the issue is.
</p>
-<h4 id="GiveAwaySoftware">"Give away software"</h4>
+<h4 id="GiveAwaySoftware">“Give away software”</h4>
<p>
-It's misleading to use the term "give away" to mean "distribute a
-program as free software." It has the same problem as "for free":
-it implies the issue is price, not freedom. One way to avoid
-the confusion is to say "release as free software."</p>
+It's misleading to use the term “give away” to mean
+“distribute a program as free software.” It has the same
+problem as “for free”: it implies the issue is price, not
+freedom. One way to avoid the confusion is to say “release as
+free software.”</p>
<h4 id="Hacker">Hacker</h4>
<p>
A hacker is someone who enjoys playful cleverness—not
-necessarily with computers. The programmers in the old MIT free
+necessarily with computers. The programmers in the old
+<abbr title="Massachusetts Institute of Technology">MIT</abbr> free
software community of the 60s and 70s referred to themselves as
hackers. Around 1980, journalists who discovered the hacker community
-mistakenly took the term to mean "security breaker".</p>
+mistakenly took the term to mean “security breaker”.</p>
<p>
Please don't spread this mistake.
-People who break security are "crackers".</p>
+People who break security are “crackers”.</p>
-<h4 id="IntellectualProperty">"Intellectual property"</h4>
+<h4 id="IntellectualProperty">“Intellectual property”</h4>
<p>
-Publishers and lawyers like to describe copyright as "intellectual
-property"—a term that also includes patents, trademarks, and other
-more obscure areas of law. These laws have so little in common, and
-differ so much, that it is ill-advised to generalize about them. It
-is best to talk specifically about "copyright," or about
-"patents," or about "trademarks."</p>
-<p>
-The term "intellectual property" carries a hidden assumption—that
-the way to think about all these disparate issues is based on an
-analogy with physical objects, and our ideas of physical property.</p>
+Publishers and lawyers like to describe copyright as
+“intellectual property”—a term that also includes
+patents, trademarks, and other more obscure areas of law. These laws
+have so little in common, and differ so much, that it is ill-advised
+to generalize about them. It is best to talk specifically about
+“copyright,” or about “patents,” or about
+“trademarks.”</p>
+<p>
+The term “intellectual property” carries a hidden
+assumption—that the way to think about all these disparate
+issues is based on an analogy with physical objects, and our ideas of
+physical property.</p>
<p>
When it comes to copying, this analogy disregards the crucial
difference between material objects and information: information can
@@ -305,19 +324,20 @@
be.</p>
<p>
To avoid the bias and confusion of this term, it is best to make a
-firm decision <a href="/philosophy/not-ipr.xhtml"> not to speak or even
-think in terms of "intellectual property"</a>.</p>
+firm decision <a href="/philosophy/not-ipr.html"> not to speak or even
+think in terms of “intellectual property”</a>.</p>
<p>
-The hypocrisy of calling these powers "rights" is
+The hypocrisy of calling these powers “rights” is
<a href="/philosophy/wipo-PublicAwarenessOfCopyright-2002.html">
starting to make WIPO embarassed</a>.</p>
-<h4 id="LAMP">"LAMP system"</h4>
+<h4 id="LAMP">“LAMP system”</h4>
<p>
-"LAMP" stands for "Linux, Apache, MySQL and PHP"—a common
-combination of software to use on a web server, except that "Linux"
-really refers to the GNU/Linux system. So instead of "LAMP" it should
-be "GLAMP": "GNU, Linux, Apache, MySQL and PHP"
+“LAMP” stands for “Linux, Apache, MySQL and
+PHP”—a common combination of software to use on a web
+server, except that “Linux” really refers to the GNU/Linux
+system. So instead of “LAMP” it should be
+“GLAMP”: “GNU, Linux, Apache, MySQL and PHP”
</p>
<h4 id="Linux">Linux system</h4>
@@ -325,18 +345,18 @@
<p>
Linux is the name of the kernel that Linus Torvalds developed starting
in 1991. The operating system in which Linux is used is basically GNU
-with Linux added. To call the whole system "Linux" is both unfair and
-confusing. Please call the complete
-system <a href="/gnu/linux-and-gnu.html"> GNU/Linux</A>, both to give
+with Linux added. To call the whole system “Linux” is
+both unfair and confusing. Please call the complete
+system <a href="/gnu/linux-and-gnu.html"> GNU/Linux</a>, both to give
the GNU Project credit and distinguish the whole system from the
kernel alone.
</p>
-<h4 id="Market">"Market"</h4>
+<h4 id="Market">“Market”</h4>
<p>
It is misleading to describe the users of free software, or the
-software users in general, as a "market".</p>
+software users in general, as a “market”.</p>
<p>
This is not to say we're against markets. If you have a free software
support business, then you have clients, and you trade with them in a
@@ -350,170 +370,177 @@
campaign for mere success is to diminish the significance of freedom.</p>
-<h4 id="MP3Player">"MP3 player"</h4>
+<h4 id="MP3Player">“MP3 player”</h4>
<p>
In the late 1990's it became feasible to make portable, solid-state
-digital audio players. Most support the patented MP3 codec, but not all.
-Some support the patent-free audio codecs Ogg Vorbis and FLAC, and may
-not even support MP3-encoded files at all, precisely to avoid the
-patents. To call such players "MP3 players" is not only confusing, it
-also puts MP3 in an undeserved position of privilege which helps the
-patent holders continue to attack our community. We suggest the terms
-"digital audio player", or simply "audio player" if context permits.</p>
-
-
-<h4 id="Open">"Open"</h4>
-<p>
-Please avoid using the word "open" as a substitute for "free
-software". A <a href="/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.html">
-different group</a>, whose values are less idealistic than ours, uses
-"open source" as its slogan. If you are referring to them, it is
-proper to use their name, but please don't lump us in with them
-or describe our work by their label—that leads people to think
-we are their supporters.</p>
-
-
-<h4 id="PC">"PC"</h4>
-<p>
-It's ok to use the abbreviation "PC" to refer to a certain kind
-of computer hardware, but please don't use it with the implication
-that the computer is running Microsoft Windows. If you install
-GNU/Linux on the same computer, it is still a PC.</p>
-
-
-<h4 id="Piracy">"Piracy"</h4>
-<p>
-Publishers often refer to prohibited copying as "piracy." In this
-way, they imply that illegal copying is ethically equivalent to
-attacking ships on the high seas, kidnapping and murdering the people
-on them.</p>
+digital audio players. Most support the patented MP3 codec, but not
+all. Some support the patent-free audio codecs Ogg Vorbis and FLAC,
+and may not even support MP3-encoded files at all, precisely to avoid
+the patents. To call such players “MP3 players” is not
+only confusing, it also puts MP3 in an undeserved position of
+privilege which helps the patent holders continue to attack our
+community. We suggest the terms “digital audio player”,
+or simply “audio player” if context permits.</p>
+
+
+<h4 id="Open">“Open”</h4>
+<p>
+Please avoid using the word “open” as a substitute for
+“free software”.
+A <a href="/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.html"> different
+group</a>, whose values are less idealistic than ours, uses
+“open source” as its slogan. If you are referring to
+them, it is proper to use their name, but please don't lump us in with
+them or describe our work by their label—that leads people to
+think we are their supporters.</p>
+
+
+<h4 id="PC">“PC”</h4>
+<p>
+It's ok to use the abbreviation “PC” to refer to a certain
+kind of computer hardware, but please don't use it with the
+implication that the computer is running Microsoft Windows. If you
+install GNU/Linux on the same computer, it is still a PC.</p>
+
+
+<h4 id="Piracy">“Piracy”</h4>
+<p>
+Publishers often refer to prohibited copying as “piracy.”
+In this way, they imply that illegal copying is ethically equivalent
+to attacking ships on the high seas, kidnapping and murdering the
+people on them.</p>
<p>
If you don't believe that illegal copying is just like kidnapping and
-murder, you might prefer not to use the word "piracy" to describe
-it. Neutral terms such as "prohibited copying" or "unauthorized
-copying" are available for use instead. Some of us might even prefer
-to use a positive term such as "sharing information with your
-neighbor."</p>
+murder, you might prefer not to use the word “piracy” to
+describe it. Neutral terms such as “prohibited copying”
+or “unauthorized copying” are available for use instead.
+Some of us might even prefer to use a positive term such as
+“sharing information with your neighbor.”</p>
-<h4 id="Protection">"Protection"</h4>
+<h4 id="Protection">“Protection”</h4>
<p>
-Publishers' lawyers love to use the term "protection" to describe
-copyright. This word carries the implication of preventing
+Publishers' lawyers love to use the term “protection” to
+describe copyright. This word carries the implication of preventing
destruction or suffering; therefore, it encourages people to identify
with the owner and publisher who benefit from copyright, rather than
with the users who are restricted by it.</p>
<p>
-It is easy to avoid "protection" and use neutral terms instead. For
-example, instead of "Copyright protection lasts a very long time,"
-you can say, "Copyright lasts a very long time."</p>
+It is easy to avoid “protection” and use neutral terms
+instead. For example, instead of “Copyright protection lasts a
+very long time,” you can say, “Copyright lasts a very long
+time.”</p>
<p>
If you want to criticize copyright instead of supporting it, you can
-use the term "copyright restrictions." So you can say, "Copyright
-restrictions last a very long time."</p>
+use the term “copyright restrictions.” So you can say,
+“Copyright restrictions last a very long time.”</p>
<p>
-The term "protection" is also used to describe malicious features, as
-in "copy protection", a feature that interferes with copying. From
-the user's point of view, this is obstruction. So we call that
-malicious feature "copy obstruction".</p>
+The term “protection” is also used to describe malicious
+features, as in “copy protection”, a feature that
+interferes with copying. From the user's point of view, this is
+obstruction. So we call that malicious feature “copy
+obstruction”.</p>
-<h4 id="RAND">"RAND (reasonable and non-discriminatory)"</h4>
+<h4 id="RAND">“RAND (reasonable and non-discriminatory)”</h4>
<p>
Standards bodies that promulgate patent-restricted standards that
prohibit free software typically have a policy of obtaining patent
licenses that require a fixed fee per copy of a conforming program.
-They often refer to such licenses by the term "RAND," which stands
-for "reasonable and non-discriminatory."</p>
+They often refer to such licenses by the term “RAND,”
+which stands for “reasonable and non-discriminatory.”</p>
<p>
That term white-washes a class of patent licenses that are normally
neither reasonable nor non-discriminatory. It is true that these
licenses do not discriminate against any specific person, but they do
discriminate against the free software community, and that makes them
-unreasonable. Thus, half of "RAND" is deceptive and the other half
-is prejudiced.</p>
+unreasonable. Thus, half of “RAND” is deceptive and the
+other half is prejudiced.</p>
<p>
Standards bodies should recognize that these licenses are
-discriminatory, and drop the use of the term "reasonable and
-non-discriminatory" or "RAND" to describe them. Until they do so,
-other writers who do not wish to join in the white-washing would do
-well to reject that term. To accept and use it merely because
-patent-wielding companies have made it widespread is to let those
-companies dictate the views you express.</p>
-<p>
-We suggest the term "uniform fee only," or "UFO" for short, as a
-replacement. It is accurate because the only condition in these
-licenses is a uniform royalty fee.</p>
-
-
-<h4 id="SellSoftware">"Sell software"</h4>
-<p>
-The term "sell software" is ambiguous. Strictly speaking,
-exchanging a copy of a free program for a sum of money is "selling";
-but people usually associate the term "sell" with proprietary
-restrictions on the subsequent use of the software. You can be more
-precise, and prevent confusion, by saying either "distributing copies
-of a program for a fee" or "imposing proprietary restrictions on the
-use of a program," depending on what you mean.</p>
+discriminatory, and drop the use of the term “reasonable and
+non-discriminatory” or “RAND” to describe them.
+Until they do so, other writers who do not wish to join in the
+white-washing would do well to reject that term. To accept and use it
+merely because patent-wielding companies have made it widespread is to
+let those companies dictate the views you express.</p>
+<p>
+We suggest the term “uniform fee only,” or
+“UFO” for short, as a replacement. It is accurate because
+the only condition in these licenses is a uniform royalty fee.</p>
+
+
+<h4 id="SellSoftware">“Sell software”</h4>
+<p>
+The term “sell software” is ambiguous. Strictly speaking,
+exchanging a copy of a free program for a sum of money is
+“selling”; but people usually associate the term
+“sell” with proprietary restrictions on the subsequent use
+of the software. You can be more precise, and prevent confusion, by
+saying either “distributing copies of a program for a fee”
+or “imposing proprietary restrictions on the use of a
+program,” depending on what you mean.</p>
<p>
See <a href="/philosophy/selling.html">Selling Free Software</a> for
more discussion of this issue.</p>
-<h4 id="SoftwareIndustry">"Software Industry"</h4>
+<h4 id="SoftwareIndustry">“Software Industry”</h4>
<p>
-The term "software industry" encourages people to imagine
-that software is always developed by a sort of factory
-and then delivered to consumers. The free software community
-shows this is not the case. Software businesses exist, and
-various businesses develop free and/or non-free software,
-but those that develop free software are not like factories.</p>
-<p>
-The term "industry" is being used as propaganda by advocates of
-software patents. They call software development "industry" and
-then try to argue that this means it should be subject to patent
-monopolies. <a href="http://swpat.ffii.org/papers/europarl0309/";>
-The European Parliament, rejecting software patents
-in 2003, voted to define "industry" as "automated production
-of material goods".</a></p>
-
-
-<h4 id="Theft">"Theft"</h4>
-<p>
-Copyright apologists often use words like "stolen" and "theft" to
-describe copyright infringement. At the same time, they ask us to
-treat the legal system as an authority on ethics: if copying is
-forbidden, it must be wrong.</p>
-<p>
-So it is pertinent to mention that the legal system—at least in the
-US—rejects the idea that copyright infringement is "theft."
-Copyright apologists are making an appeal to authority … and
-misrepresenting what authority says.</p>
+The term “software industry” encourages people to imagine
+that software is always developed by a sort of factory and then
+delivered to consumers. The free software community shows this is not
+the case. Software businesses exist, and various businesses develop
+free and/or non-free software, but those that develop free software
+are not like factories.</p>
+<p>
+The term “industry” is being used as propaganda by
+advocates of software patents. They call software development
+“industry” and then try to argue that this means it should
+be subject to patent
+monopolies. <a href="http://swpat.ffii.org/papers/europarl0309/";> The
+European Parliament, rejecting software patents in 2003, voted to
+define “industry” as “automated production of
+material goods”.</a></p>
+
+2
+<h4 id="Theft">“Theft”</h4>
+<p>
+Copyright apologists often use words like “stolen” and
+“theft” to describe copyright infringement. At the same
+time, they ask us to treat the legal system as an authority on ethics:
+if copying is forbidden, it must be wrong.</p>
+<p>
+So it is pertinent to mention that the legal system—at least in
+the US—rejects the idea that copyright infringement is
+“theft.” Copyright apologists are making an appeal to
+authority … and misrepresenting what authority says.</p>
<p>
The idea that laws decide what is right or wrong is mistaken in
general. Laws are, at their best, an attempt to achieve justice; to
say that laws define justice or ethical conduct is turning things
upside down.</p>
-<h4 id="TrustedComputing">"Trusted Computing"</h4>
+<h4 id="TrustedComputing">“Trusted Computing”</h4>
<p>
-<a href="can-you-trust.html">"Trusted computing"</a> is the proponents
-name for a scheme to redesign computers so that application developers
-can trust your computer to obey them instead of you. For their point
-of view, it is "trusted". From your point of view, it is
-"treacherous".
+<a href="can-you-trust.html">“Trusted computing”</a> is
+the proponents name for a scheme to redesign computers so that
+application developers can trust your computer to obey them instead of
+you. For their point of view, it is “trusted”. From your
+point of view, it is “treacherous”.
</p>
-<h4 id="Vendor">"Vendor"</h4>
+<h4 id="Vendor">“Vendor”</h4>
<p>
-Please don't use the term "vendor" to refer generally to anyone that
-develops or packages a software package. Many programs are developed
-in order to sell copies, and their developers are therefore their
-vendors; this includes some free software packages. However, many
-programs are developed by volunteers or organizations which do not
-intend to sell copies. These developers are not vendors. Likewise,
-only some of the packagers of GNU/Linux distributions are vendors.
+Please don't use the term “vendor” to refer generally to
+anyone that develops or packages a software package. Many programs
+are developed in order to sell copies, and their developers are
+therefore their vendors; this includes some free software packages.
+However, many programs are developed by volunteers or organizations
+which do not intend to sell copies. These developers are not vendors.
+Likewise, only some of the packagers of GNU/Linux distributions are
+vendors.
</p>
<div class="announcement">
@@ -524,46 +551,47 @@
<h4>This essay is published in <a href="/doc/book13.html"><cite>Free Software,
Free Society: The Selected Essays of Richard M. Stallman</cite></a>.</h4>
+</div>
+
<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
<div id="footer">
- <p>
- Please send FSF & GNU inquiries to
- <a href="mailto:address@hidden";><em>address@hidden</em></a>.
- There are also <a href="http://www.fsf.org/about/contact.html";>other ways
to contact</a>
- the FSF.
- <br />
- Please send broken links and other corrections (or suggestions) to
- <a href="mailto:address@hidden";><em>address@hidden</em></a>.
- </p>
-
- <p>
- Please see the
- <a href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
- README</a> for information on coordinating and submitting
- translations of this article.
- </p>
-
- <p>
-Copyright (C) 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2007
-Free Software Foundation, Inc., 51 Franklin St, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA
-02110, USA
- <br />
- Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire article is
- permitted in any medium without royalty provided this notice is
- preserved.
- </p>
-
- <p>
- Updated:
- <!-- timestamp start -->
- $Date: 2007/05/13 20:01:21 $
- <!-- timestamp end -->
- </p>
+<p>
+Please send FSF & GNU inquiries to
+<a href="mailto:address@hidden";><em>address@hidden</em></a>.
+There are also <a href="/contact/">other ways to contact</a>
+the FSF.
+<br />
+Please send broken links and other corrections or suggestions to
+<a href="mailto:address@hidden";><em>address@hidden</em></a>.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Please see the
+<a href="/server/standards/README.translations">Translations
+README</a> for information on coordinating and submitting
+translations of this article.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Copyright © 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2007
+Free Software Foundation, Inc.,</p>
+<address>51 Franklin St, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110, USA</address>
+<p>Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire article is
+permitted in any medium without royalty provided this notice is
+preserved.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Updated:
+<!-- timestamp start -->
+$Date: 2007/05/17 21:04:33 $
+<!-- timestamp end -->
+</p>
</div>
<div id="translations">
- <h4>Translations of this page</h4>
+<h4>Translations of this page</h4>
<!-- Please keep this list alphabetical, and in the original -->
<!-- language if possible, otherwise default to English -->
@@ -578,24 +606,32 @@
<!-- Please also check you have the 2 letter language code right versus -->
<!-- http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/IG/ert/iso639.htm -->
- <ul class="translations-list">
- <li><a href="/philosophy/words-to-avoid.ca.html">Català</a></li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/words-to-avoid.cs.html">Česky</a></li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html">English</a></li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/words-to-avoid.es.html">Español</a></li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/words-to-avoid.fr.html">Français</a></li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/words-to-avoid.it.html">Italiano</a></li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/words-to-avoid.ja.html">日本語
- </a></li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/words-to-avoid.pl.html">Polski</a></li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/words-to-avoid.pt.html">Português</a></li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/words-to-avoid.ru.html">
- Русский</a></li>
- <li><a href="/philosophy/words-to-avoid.sr.html">
- Српски</a></li>
- </ul>
-
-</div>
+<ul class="translations-list">
+<!-- Catalan -->
+<li><a
href="/philosophy/words-to-avoid.ca.html">Català</a> [ca]</li>
+<!-- Czech -->
+<li><a
href="/philosophy/words-to-avoid.cs.html">Česky</a> [cs]</li>
+<!-- English -->
+<li><a href="/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html">English</a> [en]</li>
+<!-- Spanish -->
+<li><a
href="/philosophy/words-to-avoid.es.html">Español</a> [es]</li>
+<!-- French -->
+<li><a
href="/philosophy/words-to-avoid.fr.html">Français</a> [fr]</li>
+<!-- Italian -->
+<li><a href="/philosophy/words-to-avoid.it.html">Italiano</a> [it]</li>
+<!-- Japanese -->
+<li><a
href="/philosophy/words-to-avoid.ja.html">日本語</a> [ja]</li>
+<!-- Polish -->
+<li><a href="/philosophy/words-to-avoid.pl.html">Polski</a> [pl]</li>
+<!-- Portuguese -->
+<li><a
href="/philosophy/words-to-avoid.pt.html">Português</a> [pt]</li>
+<!-- Romanian -->
+<li><a
href="/philosophy/words-to-avoid.ro.html">Română</a> [ro]</li>
+<!-- Russian -->
+<li><a
href="/philosophy/words-to-avoid.ru.html">Русский</a> [ru]</li>
+<!-- Serbian -->
+<li><a
href="/philosophy/words-to-avoid.sr.html">Српски</a> [sr]</li>
+</ul>
</div>
</div>
</body>