[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

a Free Platform License?

I'm looking for a software license, which Debian would
support, that actively encourages use of free platforms;
and consequently restricts proprietary platforms. 

While GNU/Linux is the dominant server operating system,
it lags on the desktop.  Many of my colleagues who were
just a few years ago running GNU/Linux on their laptop
have switched over to OSX for pragmatic reasons: to
avoid hardware device issues and to be compatible with
applications that the business folk use.  Why don't
laptop vendors support GNU/Linux operating systems?  
Why do business apps still only work on OSX or Windows?

I think the issue isn't one of software quality, or
effort, or tech people just "not getting design".  I
think the difficulty is how we license our software.

Free and open source software can be used without
restriction on proprietary platforms, yet, the reverse
isn't true.  If a open source application is useful
enough, it'll be ported to Windows or OSX.  As a result,
proprietary operating systems have all the goodness we
provide -- plus proprietary stuff we don't.

A platform's primary value isn't intrinsic.  Instead, it
is proportional to the platform's user base, which has a
virtuous cycle with the applications and services that
are available for this platform. 

Here's the rub.  When a free and open source application
is ported to a proprietary platform with a higher user
base, perhaps it brings higher value to that platform
than it does to the free platform it was developed with.
At the very least, a port neutralizes any relative
advantage the free platform might have had.

I think historically this was a very fine trade-off since
there was much free software to be written and the best
way to get new users was to write software that operates
on the platforms they were using.  However, is this the
right approach going forward?


Would Debian consider a "Free Platform License" (FPL) derived 
from the AGPLv3, but with the "System Library" exception 
removed (as well as the GNU specific prologue) [1]?

Perhaps more importantly, would a license such as this
actually promote free platforms in a manner that could
be somewhat enforceable?  I'm thinking for example of a
Python or Ruby application.  Would a Windows specific 
installer be permitted?

Thank you kindly for your thoughts.



[1] I'd like to thank RMS for his very helpful feedback.

Reply to: