[License-discuss] FAQ suggestion
engel.nyst at gmail.com
Sun Nov 10 18:12:13 UTC 2013
I would propose an additional paragraph to the FAQ, for the question
What is "free software" and is it the same as "open source"?
The text currently says:
> One of the tactical concerns most often cited by adopters of the term
> "open source" was the ambiguity of the English word "free", which can
> refer either to freedom or to mere monetary price; this ambiguity was
> also given by the OSI founders as a reason to prefer the new term
> (see "What Does `free' Mean, Anyway?", and similar language on the
> marketing for hackers page, both from the original 1998 web site).
At this point in the text, I'd suggest to insert a little explanation on
the ambiguity in the use of the term of open source as well. Quick draft...
> On the other hand, the term "open" applied to the source is sometimes
> used in the sense of merely "provided" or "visible", but the open
> source definition sets the criteria for "open source" to software
> licenses that guarantee a set of perpetual and irrevocable
> rights to every recipient.
The text should then probably skip "furthermore", and continue...
> The FSF uses a shorter, four-point definition of software freedom
> when evaluating licenses, while the OSI uses a longer, ten-point
> definition. The two definitions lead to the same result in practice,
> but use superficially different language to get there.
I hope it will help with a number of misunderstandings.
More information about the License-discuss