www/philosophy open-source-misses-the-point.html

[Therese Godefroy]

CVSROOT:        /webcvs/www
Module name:    www
Changes by:     Therese Godefroy <th_g> 21/12/23 05:55:08

Modified files:
        philosophy     : open-source-misses-the-point.html 

Log message:
        Restore changes of rev. 1.101 and 1.102.

CVSWeb URLs:
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.103&r2=1.104

Patches:
Index: open-source-misses-the-point.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /webcvs/www/www/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html,v
retrieving revision 1.103
retrieving revision 1.104
diff -u -b -r1.103 -r1.104
--- open-source-misses-the-point.html   23 Dec 2021 00:13:48 -0000      1.103
+++ open-source-misses-the-point.html   23 Dec 2021 10:55:06 -0000      1.104
@@ -10,12 +10,11 @@
 <!--#include virtual="/philosophy/ph-breadcrumb.html" -->
 <!--GNUN: OUT-OF-DATE NOTICE-->
 <!--#include virtual="/server/top-addendum.html" -->
-<div class="reduced-width">
+<div class="article reduced-width">
 <h2>Why Open Source Misses the Point of Free Software</h2>
 
 <address class="byline">by Richard Stallman</address>
 
-<div class="article">
 <div class="important"><p>
 The terms &ldquo;free software&rdquo; and &ldquo;open
 source&rdquo; stand for almost the same range of programs.  However,
@@ -47,7 +46,7 @@
 operating system</a>.  Most of these users, however, have never heard of 
 the ethical reasons for which we developed this system and built the free 
 software community, because nowadays this system and community are more 
-often spoken of as &ldquo;open source&rdquo;, attributing them to a 
+often spoken of as &ldquo;open source,&rdquo; attributing them to a 
 different philosophy in which these freedoms are hardly mentioned.</p>
 
 <p>The free software movement has campaigned for computer users'
@@ -112,7 +111,7 @@
 want people to know we stand for freedom, so we do not accept being
 mislabeled as open source supporters.  What we advocate is not
 &ldquo;open source,&rdquo; and what we oppose is not &ldquo;closed
-source&rdquo;.  To make this clear, we avoid using those terms.
+source.&rdquo;  To make this clear, we avoid using those terms.
 </p>
 
 <h3>Practical Differences between Free Software and Open Source</h3>
@@ -129,7 +128,7 @@
 <p>Second, when a program's source code carries a weak license, one
 without copyleft, its executables can carry additional nonfree
 conditions.  <a href="https://code.visualstudio.com/License/";>Microsoft
-does this with Visual Studio Code,</a> for example.</p>
+does this with Visual Studio Code</a>, for example.</p>
 
 <p>If these executables fully correspond to the released sources, they
 qualify as open source but not as free software.  However, in that
@@ -140,7 +139,7 @@
 computers check signatures on their executable programs to block users
 from installing different executables; only one privileged company can
 make executables that can run in the device or can access its full
-capabilities.  We call these devices &ldquo;tyrants&rdquo;, and the
+capabilities.  We call these devices &ldquo;tyrants,&rdquo; and the
 practice is called &ldquo;tivoization&rdquo; after the product (Tivo)
 where we first saw it.  Even if the executable is made from free
 source code, and nominally carries a free license, the users cannot
@@ -253,7 +252,7 @@
 criteria for software licensing are simply not pertinent.  The only
 thing these activities have in common is that they somehow invite
 people to participate.  They stretch the term so far that it only
-means &ldquo;participatory&rdquo; or &ldquo;transparent&rdquo;, or
+means &ldquo;participatory&rdquo; or &ldquo;transparent,&rdquo; or
 less than that.  At worst, it
 has <a 
href="https://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/17/opinion/sunday/morozov-open-and-closed.html";>
 become a vacuous buzzword</a>.</p>
@@ -442,7 +441,6 @@
 than ever.  Every time you say &ldquo;free software&rdquo; rather than
 &ldquo;open source,&rdquo; you help our cause.</p>
 <div class="column-limit"></div>
-</div>
 
 <h3 class="footnote">Note</h3>
 
@@ -493,6 +491,23 @@
 of this article.</p>
 </div>
 
+<!-- Regarding copyright, in general, standalone pages (as opposed to
+     files generated as part of manuals) on the GNU web server should
+     be under CC BY-ND 4.0.  Please do NOT change or remove this
+     without talking with the webmasters or licensing team first.
+     Please make sure the copyright date is consistent with the
+     document.  For web pages, it is ok to list just the latest year the
+     document was modified, or published.
+
+     If you wish to list earlier years, that is ok too.
+     Either "2001, 2002, 2003" or "2001-2003" are ok for specifying
+     years, as long as each year in the range is in fact a copyrightable
+     year, i.e., a year in which the document was published (including
+     being publicly visible on the web or in a revision control system).
+
+     There is more detail about copyright years in the GNU Maintainers
+     Information document, www.gnu.org/prep/maintain. -->
+
 <p>Copyright &copy; 2007, 2010, 2012-2016, 2019-2021 Richard Stallman</p>
 
 <p>This page is licensed under a <a rel="license"
@@ -503,7 +518,7 @@
 
 <p class="unprintable">Updated:
 <!-- timestamp start -->
-$Date: 2021/12/23 00:13:48 $
+$Date: 2021/12/23 10:55:06 $
 <!-- timestamp end -->
 </p>
 </div>