Is there a free software movement?
I just ran into this article which is not quite recent, but is asking a interesting question:
Is there a Free Software Movement?
To quote some of it:
But even if one could make a case for there being a free software movement today - a case that I suspect would be quite fragile - would it apply in the future? In five or ten years, when presumably software products that the OSI considers "Open Source" will have a pretty large market share across the board. Will we then see the split between the different sub-sections widening until we're no longer a recognisable movement?
A further question to ponder is this: will the sub-sections be assimilated by other movements that more closely associate with the sub-sections aims, logic and space? Will, for example, the Open Source advocates be assimilated into the mainstream business community, and will my interest in free software become a sub-discipline of political philosophy?
I think that the "open source movement" will "counquer" the market first causing the growth of free software movement within and on which it's been built. Than, we would have a world where you are indeed pretty much having essential software freedoms, but as well the world ruled by open source corporations and businesses as OSS really is more or less all about that (pragmatical). Then we would have a bit of a struggle between this pragmatic ideology and free software ideology where it is yet to be achieved that the existing open source world get's "re-counquered" by a more ideological movement "free software movement".
Ok.. to make it simpler, what i am basically seeing is a big open source movement that has a smaller, but firefull free software movement within. Once the open source spreads, the free software movement spreads. Once open source starts to dominate (reaching the limit of "spreading") free software movement continues to grow until it mostly dissaseminates the pragmatic open source ideology on the wake of nano-tech era where such ideology (os) wont be viewed with such "respect" as now.
Open source is an "ideology" with which free software ideologists wont exactly agree as it's more pragmatic and tends to integrate more with proprietary software as it doesn't considers it that much of a wrong choice as free software movement. BUT, open source acts like a "coincidental" weapon of mass adoption for free software, just opening the doors wider to the pure free software ideology.
Okay, i hope you know what i mean now :-)
What do you think?
Thx
Dan
Free software will grow and become more distinctive, something it lacks in the shadow of OSI, if developers continue to develop software. The truth is that the Free Software movement will have a hard time ever dieing as long as people still use the GPL and code licensed under it. The GPL is the focal license of the Free Software movement and as long as its use continues Free Software won't go away.
Unless RMS and the FSF decide to become more "open" and less "free" there will always be a distinctive difference between OSS and FS because there is a difference in how they look at software and how it should be done.
That's true. What i also wanted to point out was that "open source" is, even though it might be uninvited, doing a great job at bringing people over to the free software movement. It's like some kind of a mid-point for everyone. They first hear about open source, get interested and then they learn about free software movement and ideology of software freedom and it's importence. I think many like myself stick with that ideology adding to the growth of free software movement and it's disctinctions actually. And the more open source grows, the more free software movement grows. Once open source starts dominating, free software will set itself on a goal of "eating up" open source from the inside or better said, converting it from pragmatical OS ideology to "pure" free software idelogy
Here's one article i came across on that issue:
Is "Free Software" dead?
and one interesting quote from it:
The distinction between "open source" and "free software" is not technical; it's the same code and licenses. Nor is it social; it's the same developers. It's strictly one of attitude - are we focused on moralism and changing peoples' thoughts (free software) or on results and changing peoples' behavior (open source)?
True. One is to choose what is more important.
And another quote:
Reality has spoken. You get to RMS's (Richard Stallman's) condition of freedom faster by taking the pragmatic course - by shutting up and showing them the code.
Even i can admit that this is actually true due to the nature of humans, they simply want to see it working, in action and that's what "open source" is doing. However, this is NO case in point that "free software" is irrelevant and that it's dieing. There has to be someone to teach you of the real background behind the benefits "action" and *freedom* you get by free software (or "open source" as many call it). Free software movement points that out and should increasingly continue to do that. And there is also one thing people are "overlooking": who says that free software movement does not points out to the benefits and the "action" as well? It does and it did, but now when open source does it in extremes it is natural that the only role left for free software movement as a primary one is to promote the real ideology behind, ideology of freedom.
Thank you
Daniel
This thread began in the introductions section but I am replying here since it is about the free software movement.
redcone wrote:
One of the things I like about this site is that it seems to focus more on the ideology and principles of free software than on a specific OS or software project. The principles and ideas behind free software need to be promoted and awareness needs to be raised. Free software is a political and cultural issue even more than it is a technology issue and getting that message to people outside of the tech community is one of the challenges that I hope sites like this will address
daniel replied:
This is exactly one of the purposes for founding this site, to be more than just a certain project support forum or a news site, to be a full fledged discussion board and a community center for discussing everything about free software and open source. This naturally means discussing it's very ideology, philosophy and ethics, something not many sites focus on today.
In this months issue of MIT's Technology Review, Michael Schrage writes that "innovators don't change the world. The users of
their innovations do." He notes that an an innovation becomes powerful when it has "both global reach and global impact".
Both of those points are relevant to the free software movement. The free software movement has global reach. It is only now beginning to have global impact. By that, I mean IT professionals and users around the world are beginning to realize that the license, that is part of their software, matters. Does it restrict the user or does it empower the user?
A free/libre or open source license is a license to innovate. It encourages the end-user to experiment. It encourages the user to tear down and then rebuild the pieces into something very different than the original creator envisioned. The computer was originally conceived of as a way to automate mathematical calculations. The initial development of the Internet was prompted by Cold War fears of a nuclear attack. It was developed to function as a distributed computing system that could survive and function even if entire areas of the network were destroyed.
Open standards that encouraged innovation allowed computers and the internet to evolve. I doubt any of the Cold War developers imagined their research giving rise to a worldwide system for sharing photos and music, online dating and personal ads, Ebay auction sites, home networks, and many of the other common uses that now define the Web.
The traditional view on patents and copyrights say they are necessary to encourage creative development. Yet, we have all been witness to one of the greatest periods of technical creativity in history and it took place in a medium that was largely unencumbered by patents and proprietary restrictions.
Is there a free software movement? yes there is. It exists because people see the reality of what is in front of them. They see that when creative people aren't battling with lawyers and accountants, and corporate profiteers--when they are allowed free reign to experiment, to change, to redesign, to improve--that it gives rise to huge bursts of creativity. It gives rise to new technologies. it gives rise to new solutions to age old problems.
There is a free software movement and the world will be a better place because of it!
I wish to add something very important concerning this topic. Most people are annoyed at the fact that RMS has been so insistent on the ideals of freedom that he is actually hindering the development of free software and its adoption in the rest of the world, specially in the mainstream of the computer and software market.
But there is an irony in this story between free software and open source. The Open Source Movement began as a break from RMS and the Free Software Movement, to get more acceptance in the market. This has had many effects:
1. The Open Source Movement, when it broke away from the Free Software Movement, stopped adopting the criticisms RMS was making against the whole area of "intellectual property" rights. But as time went by, inevitably, the Open Source Movement, while still adhering to the belief that proprietary and open source software could coexist, had to return to many of these criticisms.
The Free Software Movement was THE source of the whole criticisms against software patents. The Open Source Movement at the beginning wanted to disassociate itself from that, but then the pressure of patent holders became so great, specially from big corporations, that they eventually had to embrace again the criticisms against software patents. Now, Open Source developers and organizations like Mozilla Foundation and the Apache Software Foundation, and Open Source leaders like Bruce Perens and Linus Torvalds himself, among many others, are protesting software patents. Not even that, even small and medium sized software developers in Europe have joined the Free Software Movement in their criticisms against software patents.
And because of SCO Group, and many similar cases with Microsoft and other proprietary software vendors, the issue of Copyright has arisen. When most in the Open Source Movement was asking RMS to shut up about "intellectual property" issues, most of RMS's predictions have come to pass, specially the problem of the secrecy and conflict that would arise thanks to the proprietary software model (to hide the code). This would mean that proprietary software vendors could accuse any kind of Open Source or Free Software developer or organization of "stealing" code. And at the same time, its own model would mean not to show the evidence unless people signed a "non-disclosure agreement". RMS began his movement PRECISELY with refusing to sign "non-disclosure agreements", and specifically in the SCO case, Open Source leaders and organizations have refused to sign non-disclosure agreements in order to see if Linux in fact has stolen code. So much for their criticism against RMS.
Finally, also concerning the issue of Copyright, the issue of deCSS to watch DVD's. The Open Source Movement favors this decription for us to watch and Rip DVD's, but it was RMS who first told us about the importance of that code be in the public hands!
2. Secondly, the Open Source Movement, in its attempt to go into the mainstream media, in my judgment has confused lots of people about what is "Linux". When I began hearing about "Linux" I believed it was the whole of the operative system. At the beginning, I thought that Linus Torvalds invented the whole operative system. So I thought that Torvalds was the one who organized GNOME, KDE, etc. etc. etc. and that he invented all of these stuff and others contributed. And of course, the name "Linux" has catched on. Obviously I was a beginner in this matter, but the more I studied the issue from an "Open Source" point of view, the more confused I was concerning what was Torvalds REALLY developing.
Finally, it was reading Sam Williams' Free as in Freedom and Stallman's Free Software, Free Society that everything fell into place! The GNU Project wanted to develop GNU, and practically the one that replaced all the proprietary programs of Unix with free programs (even with programs not developed by the GNU Project). What Torvalds REALLY did was to create the kernel, which hackers (without knowing about it) were using to fill the last missing gap in the GNU Operative System. So, in all fairness to the GNU Project, it should be called GNU/Linux.
3. Finally, if there was no Free Software Movement, there wouldn't have been any Open Source Movement. And I'm saying this in more than one sense. For example, I'm not merely saying that the Open Source Movement historically was brought forth by the Free Software Movement. But also in issues like Copyright, Patents, the GPL, the programs used for GNU/Linux and FreeBSD, etc., and even a great part of its own philosophy, depends on the Free Software Movement.
In other word, because of the stubborness, the rigid mind thinking, and the speeches and philosophy created by RMS around software, that Open Source exists.
One Final Note: There is one very important issue that has to be discussed concerning RMS statements. I don't agree 100% with RMS, but I do confess that at least I have to agree 95% with him concerning his criticism of freedom and "intellectual property" issues. We are losing our freedoms!!!! And I'm not exaggerating concerning this point! One of the guarantees of Free Software is precisely that you are guaranteed that there are no spywares in your computer, that another company doesn't have any power to fobid you to install any program, or to use encryption, or to read whatever you want to read, not to be tracked down by the government, to share with others, etc. As the digitalized world advances, and globalization develops more and more, the power of software and culture are falling in the hands of few companies! So, RMS stubborness and almost intollerant behavior towards proprietary software has a reason for being. If people don't take his message, and many others' seriously, in 20 or 30 years, probably he will say: "I told you so!"
I recommend everyone to PLEASE read Lawrence Lessig's book Free Culture, which is available for sale, and also for download here
All I have to say is... Good job!
Prosario, you wrote a great *article* upthere. I fully agree. Maybe you could "format" it as a full fledged article for publishing in articles section. It would be submited to lxer, newsforge and linuxtoday. I think this is a very good material for people to read and understand on this subject.
Let me know..
Thanks
Daniel
Dear Prosario_2000,
Danijel is right, you could write an article from the message above. And, if you wish, we can help you. Cannot we? :yes:
Rijik.
Heh.. if he agrees it is indeed possible.. it would be a cooperatively developed work that's based on his original. :-)
Thanks
Daniel