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

[Rik Tindall]

Timothy Musson wrote:
> Rik Tindall wrote:
>  =20
>> Hi, thanks Tim, sorry for the late reply..
>>    =20
>
> That's okay - I've been pretty busy too :^)
>  =20
>> The beginning and the end of the matter - as far as I can tell - is:
>>
>> If you've getting your English [language] meaning from a non-English [=
language] speaker, then=20
>> you went there for something else.

I'm all for "Libre" in context, but don't see its export to us as a=20
helpful one at all.

FLOSSWorld <http://www.flossworld.org> "Free/Libre/Open Source Software:=20
..project <http://www.flossproject.org> aims to strengthen Europe's=20
leadership in research into FLOSS & open standards, building a global=20
constituency with partners from Argentina, Brazil, Bulgaria, China,=20
Croatia, India, Malaysia & South Africa ..to exploit research & policy=20
complementarities to improve international cooperation ..of=20
policy-makers & researchers ..enhance Europe's leading role.. strongly=20
embed Europe in a global network"

(to provide the answer NIck requested earlier)

- in this sense, I see Europe's "Libre/Open" rejoinder to GNU-reach as=20
reactionary, stemming from Europe's class-ridden reflexes. Post-Franco=20
in origin, it seems.

>
> I should probably have made it clear right at the start that I wasn't
> trying to tell you (or anyone else) what terms to use, but explaining
> why I use the terms I use.
>  =20

Never interpreted differently :)

> If you want FOSS to be the "official" term used for GNUz and GLU events=
,
> posters, etc., I don't have a problem with that at all.
>
> Personally, I'll continue to stick an L in FOSS whenever I feel like it=
.
>  =20

which right to no-one challenges.

> Which won't happen often, because I've decided to avoid both terms and
> stick to "Free Software" :^)
>  =20

I tend to agree :)

- There's a ton of OSS advocacy already.

>> - as on any project - and once it is made, then we just have to accept
>> "that's how it is" (here); like, once a democracy has elected a 'left'
>> or 'right' government, then everyone just gets on with working under
>> _that's_the_way_it_is_, or they choose to emigrate.
>>    =20
>
> *mumbles something about protest and civil disobedience* :^)
>  =20

I'm with you 100% there, but try taking that line with Linus T or Mark S.=
.

Which is why we have this happy echo :)

- It highlights the cultural point, and provides for some project guidanc=
e.

>> Me too. Unreservedly. But with the two capitals.
>>    =20
>
> I don't think about Free software as a brand. I use a capital F to hint
> that I'm not talking about the ordinary adjective "free" (...so, I
> sometimes apply Free with a capital F to things other than software).
>
> I don't expect anyone to agree, it's just a habit :^)
>  =20

And a good one: "last year has seen people finally begin to realise that=20
free and open software can have a profound effect on their lives =97 and,=
=20
in many cases, shape those lives"**

http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/0,1000000121,39287036,00.htm?r=3D1

>
> What's the first thing people think of when they hear "Free!"?
> What's the first thing people think of when they hear "Liberty!"?
>
> I know which one I'd count on to give the correct impression.
>  =20

True. But to a largely uneducated audience?..

>> The 'FLOSS' campaign is an injunction to delimit "Free" usage, and you=
,=20
>> nor anyone, have no legal right to intercede in Free Software branding=
=20
>> in this way, as I see it.
>>    =20
>
> Of course I have the legal right to refer to Free software as FLOSS if =
I
> wish to. Just as people have every right to refer to GNU/Linux as Linux
> if they wish to.
>  =20

I don't even know that law's required in this defence - plain common=20
sense suffices, and arguing for where to improve upon it..

>>> You know, even Microsoft provides some of it's non-libre software und=
er
>>> an "Open Source" license that could be described as "FOSS", if you ta=
ke
>>> "free" to mean gratis.
>>>      =20
>
>  =20
>> That is precisely the point. We _never_ take "Free" (the brand) to mea=
n=20
>> 'just gratis'. Is it licensed GPL? - If not _it's_not_Free_.
>>    =20
>
> (I think you know that there are several truly Free software licenses
> besides the GPL.)
>  =20

That's where it gets confusing - brand or definition?..

> Best regards,
>
> Tim
>  =20

Best regards,=20

Rik