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

Re: [OT] Free software vs non-free, here we go again

Hash: SHA1

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 01:09:03PM +0200, Nicolas George wrote:
> Le nonidi 9 vendémiaire, an CCXXIV, Reco a écrit :
> > 'Open-source' by itself does not imply that the software is free (as in
> > libre).
> > 
> > A fine example of such software is RAR archiver.
> > They give you the source - https://packages.debian.org/stretch/rar
> > They forbid you to change it. They require you to buy the software after
> > a certain time of usage, or uninstall it.
> > They rightfully put RAR into non-free in Debian, because the software is
> > 'non-free' indeed. But - it's definitely 'open-source'.
> Apparently, you are mistaken about what "Open Source" means. "Open Source"
> is a trademark, it corresponds to a precise definition published by the Open
> Source Initiative. The difference between Open Source and Libre software is
> very minute, almost as minute as the difference between the various
> definitions of Libre software (four essential freedoms according to the FSF,
> DFSG, etc.).

The letter of the law my dear Shylock, the letter.

But in spirit, Open Source and Free Software couldn't be more different.
The one is about a more efficient software production model, the other
about the user's rights.

But such "spirit" things are difficult to grasp at times :-)

In practice, and technically, most Open Source software is Free, and all
Free Software is Open Source. But watch those folks in a corporate
environment awkwardly avoiding the F word -- or read Bruce Perens, one
of those who coined Open Source writing that in hindsight it may have
been a mistake to realize that the people behind those flavors are
quite different.

- -- t
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)


Reply to: