[GNUz] What did the FSF ever do for us?

[Rik Tindall]

Nick Rout wrote:

>On Fri, May 4, 2007 1:29 pm, Sue McGaw wrote:
>  
>
>>yes i was dissapointed in reply from SFd organiser who lumped FLOSS and
>>Foss together as one.,
>>    
>>
>
>Please explain the difference between floss and foss? (I don't believe
>there is one, so please explain.
>  
>
What some 'net research shows is that the term "Libre" is pushed from 
Europe, to progress economic leverage viz a viz the US (following the 
LinOSS input), by replacing "Free" in software usage.

a) "Libre" is redundant if you've just said "Free", so why the 
initiative to state it? - Because it conditions "Free", in the very same 
way that is already achieved by the "OSS" in FOSS, prior to replacing it 
entirely. i.e. A number of European+ programmers are pushing to remove 
the "gratis" option within Freedom 2, through "Libre" usage, though more 
want to keep it.

b) Linux Australia has aligned with initiative 'a', documentation shows. 
Pia is seeking increased SFD funding by this same (EU/UN aligned) 
business route. The price of the deal would seem to be admitting "Libre" 
into the SFD discourse - a good thing? - possible? ... [Apologies if 
I've misread this; more info is welcome, though bureaucratic politics 
are skilled in not providing much.]

c) Spreading influences 'b' to A-NZ, at the cost of "Free"/GNU, is not 
entirely welcome. - Hence some bitter response to the fLOSS.

Diplomacy is welcome.

Cheers & hth, Rik