Silly season is upon us.
The Free Software Foundation is on the warpath against Microsoft's launch of Windows 7, as CNET's Ina Fried reports, denouncing Microsoft for "poisoning education," "invading privacy," and other evils.
The irony is that the Web site used to promote this latest rant uses a license that prohibits derivative works, a cardinal sin in Free Software Foundation theology.
The site uses the Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 3.0 License, which allows people to copy and distribute a page, but not to actually modify and improve upon it ("No Derivative Works--You may not alter, transform, or build upon this work.")
This sounds reasonable to me, but has traditionally not sounded reasonable to the Free Software Foundation.
For example, foundation founder Richard Stallman was in Argentina on Wednesday and when mentioning Wikipedia, he suggested that the open-source ethos depends upon freedom of text/code:
Wikipedia's text is free. It is released under a free license. That is the aspect to me that makes it ethical.
The freedom to modify that text is an essential freedom for which the Free Software Foundation has spent decades fighting. It's the first freedom listed at the top of its site:
Freedom...as defined by the Free Software Foundation
(Credit: Free Software Foundation)But apparently it's not an essential freedom for its anti-Microsoft screeds.
I'm not a fan of Microsoft, but the Free Software Foundation's hypocrisy on this is galling. Its logic is also a bit wearing, as Download Squad notes. The Free Software Foundation wants to make lack of freedom the source for all ills. It's not. It's just a good start.
Against this sort of dogmatism is a much more rational response to competition with proprietary software: the Processing project's FAQ. Processing has been positioned by some as an open-source competitor to Flash, but Processing's developers refuse to be drawn in and respond:
We're not targeting the same audience Flash. If we wanted to make a Flash killer, we'd have set out to do that and our stated purpose would have been more specific (and we'd have more on the site about "Processing vs. Flash" in the competitive shootout sense... right now we just have information about how the syntax differs so that people can make the transition).
We could have saved a lot of time if we just wanted to build a better Flash. But as two people, do you really think we can or should bother competing with a company as large as Macromedia? Macrodobe? Does anyone really want a "better" Flash? We certainly don't, so that's not an interesting goal for us.
There are things that are always going to be better in Flash, and other types of work that will always be better in Processing. But fundamentally (and this cannot be emphasized enough), this is not an all-or-nothing game... We're talking about tools. Do people refuse to use pencils because pens exist? No, you just use them for different things, and for specific reasons. If Processing works for you, then use it. If not, don't. It's easy! It's free! You're not being forced to do anything.
How refreshing--that "reason" thing. It would be nice if the Free Software Foundation spent more time coding the changes it would like to see in the world, rather than writing to Fortune 500 companies to advocate they switch to Microsoft alternatives.
Put your code where your mouth is, Free Software Foundation. And make sure it's truly open to derivative works, while you're at it.
Follow me on Twitter @mjasay.
The GNU mascot
(Credit: GNU.org)The Free Software Foundation has released Happy Birthday to GNU to celebrate the silver anniversary of the operating system.
The film, presented by actor/comedian Stephen Fry, offers a basic history of GNU's Not Unix (GNU). Fry describes how Richard Stallman announced a plan in September 1983 to develop a free-software, Unix-like operating system called GNU, and adds that the Linux kernel was re-released under the GNU General Public License in 1992. The GNU/Linux combination provided the first completely nonproprietary way for people to run a PC.
Peter Brown, the Free Software Foundation's executive director, said the video should act not only as a reminder of GNU's history but as a "rallying call for the work that still needs to be done."
"We intend for the 25th anniversary to be more than just a reflection on the history of the free-software movement. Because, despite all of the success brought about by the GNU system and other free-software projects, we still need a determined effort to replace or eliminate the proprietary applications, platforms, drivers and firmware that many users still run," Brown said in a statement.
What do you get an operating system that has everything? How about GNU's official stuffed gnu?
(Credit: GNU.org)The foundation plans further releases as part of the monthlong anniversary celebrations, with announcements timed for Software Freedom Day on 20 September and for the GNU anniversary itself on September 27.
In the video, available for download at GNU.org, Fry says that proprietary operating systems are akin to "bad science," as unofficial modifications to the operating system are prohibited.
"You can't really fiddle with your operating system, and you certainly can't share any ideas you have about your operating system with other people, because Apple and Microsoft, who run the two most popular operating systems, are very firm about the fact that they own that," Fry says.
The actor goes on to say that, for many people, it is natural not to be able to make modifications, but Fry asks why making modifications should be illegal.
"All knowledge is free and all knowledge is shared in good science. If it isn't, it's bad science, and really a kind of tyranny," he says.
Tom Espiner of ZDNet UK reported from London.
|
Lotus knows there's more to work than just email.
Connect with people. Get live feeds. Create widgets. Work securely online or off. Try IBM Lotus Notes.
|
 |
- prev
- 1
- next
