[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
www/philosophy open-source-misses-the-point.html
|
From: |
Richard M. Stallman |
|
Subject: |
www/philosophy open-source-misses-the-point.html |
|
Date: |
Sun, 30 Dec 2012 15:15:50 +0000 |
CVSROOT: /web/www
Module name: www
Changes by: Richard M. Stallman <rms> 12/12/30 15:15:49
Modified files:
philosophy : open-source-misses-the-point.html
Log message:
Move the part about practical differences between free software and
open source, added in 1.49, into a separate section and split up
paragraphs.
(Common Misunderstandings): Delete the very brief explanation of
practical
differenes. Add sentence with link to license-list.html. Minor
cleanups.
CVSWeb URLs:
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.51&r2=1.52
Patches:
Index: open-source-misses-the-point.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html,v
retrieving revision 1.51
retrieving revision 1.52
diff -u -b -r1.51 -r1.52
--- open-source-misses-the-point.html 30 Dec 2012 09:12:12 -0000 1.51
+++ open-source-misses-the-point.html 30 Dec 2012 15:15:49 -0000 1.52
@@ -61,23 +61,6 @@
of open source have come to it since then, and they make the same
association.</p>
-<p>In practice, open source stands for criteria a little weaker than
-those of free software. As far as we know, all existing free software
-would qualify as open source. Nearly all open source software is free
-software, but there are exceptions. First, some open source licenses
-are too restrictive, so they do not qualify as free licenses.
-Fortunately those licenses are not used on many programs. Second, and
-more importantly, many computers (including many Android devices)
-contain executable programs that correspond to free software source
-code, but the devices do not allow the user to install modified
-versions of those executables, but one special company has the power
-to do so. We call these devices “tyrants”,
-and the practice is called “tivoization” after the
-product where we first saw the practice. These executables are not
-free software even though their source code is free software. The
-open source supporters do not concern themselves with this issue;
-their concern is limited to the license of the source code.</p>
-
<p>The two terms
describe almost the same category of software, but they stand for
views based on fundamentally different values. Open source is a
@@ -104,6 +87,26 @@
we want people to know we stand for freedom, so we do not accept being
mislabeled as open source supporters.</p>
+<h3>Practical Differences between Free Software and Open Source</h3>
+
+<p>In practice, open source stands for criteria a little weaker than
+those of free software. As far as we know, all existing free software
+would qualify as open source. Nearly all open source software is free
+software, but there are exceptions. First, some open source licenses
+are too restrictive, so they do not qualify as free licenses.
+Fortunately, few programs use those licenses.</p>
+
+<p>Second, and more important, many products containing computers
+(including many Android devices) come with executable programs that
+correspond to free software source code, but the devices do not allow
+the user to install modified versions of those executables; only one
+special company has the power to modify them. We call these devices
+“tyrants”, and the practice is called
+“tivoization” after the product where we first saw it.
+These executables are not free software even though their source code
+is free software. The criteria for open source do not recognize this
+issue; they are concerned solely with the licensing of the source code.</p>
+
<h3>Common Misunderstandings of “Free Software” and
“Open Source”</h3>
@@ -131,11 +134,7 @@
“open source software”</a> (which is published by the Open
Source Initiative and is too long to include here) was derived
indirectly from our criteria for free software. It is not the same;
-it is a little looser in some respects, so the open source people have
-accepted a few licenses that we consider unacceptably restrictive.
-Also, they judge solely by the license of the source code, whereas our
-criterion also considers whether a device will let you <em>run</em>
-your modified version of the program. Nonetheless, their definition
+it is a little looser in some respects. Nonetheless, their definition
agrees with our definition in most cases.</p>
<p>However, the obvious meaning for the expression “open source
@@ -145,13 +144,13 @@
weaker also than the official definition of open source. It includes
many programs that are neither free nor open source.</p>
-<p>Since that obvious meaning for “open source” is not the
+<p>Since the obvious meaning for “open source” is not the
meaning that its advocates intend, the result is that most people
misunderstand the term. According to writer Neal Stephenson,
“Linux is ‘open source’ software meaning, simply,
that anyone can get copies of its source code files.” I don't
think he deliberately sought to reject or dispute the
-“official” definition. I think he simply applied the
+official definition. I think he simply applied the
conventions of the English language to come up with a meaning for the
term. The state of Kansas published a similar definition:
<!-- It was from http://da.state.ks.us/itec/TechArchPt6ver80.pdf, but
@@ -181,8 +180,10 @@
that it means “not using the GNU GPL.” This tends to
accompany another misunderstanding that “free software”
means “GPL-covered software.” These are both mistaken,
-since the GNU GPL qualifies as an open source license and most of
-the open source licenses qualify as free software licenses.</p>
+since the GNU GPL qualifies as an open source license and most of the
+open source licenses qualify as free software licenses. There
+are <a href="/licenses/license-list.html"> many free software
+licenses</a> aside from the GNU GPL.</p>
<p>The term “open source” has been further stretched by
its application to other activities, such as government, education,
@@ -376,7 +377,7 @@
<p>
Updated:
<!-- timestamp start -->
-$Date: 2012/12/30 09:12:12 $
+$Date: 2012/12/30 15:15:49 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
</div>