| Both sides previous revision
Previous revision
Next revision
|
Previous revision
Next revision
Both sides next revision
|
a_business_case_for_free_software [2020/05/11 14:35]
rijk [The Walk of Freedom] |
a_business_case_for_free_software [2020/05/11 14:42]
rijk [A Business Case for Free Software] |
| ====== A Business Case for Free Software ====== | ====== A Business Case for Free Software ====== |
| |
| A Personal Account by Rijk Ravestein. March 21, 2020. [[https://www.librepractice.org/pub/a-business-case-for-free-software-20200321.pdf|PDF Version]] | A Personal Account by Rijk Ravestein. May 11, 2020. [[https://www.librepractice.org/pub/a-business-case-for-free-software-20200511.pdf|PDF Version]] |
| |
| This work is licensed under a [[https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/| Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License]]. | This work is licensed under a [[https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/| Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License]]. |
| The Free Software Foundation (FSF) was founded in the mid eighties with Personal Computing becoming mainstream. In that context Free Software and the GPL made perfect sense. Thirty-five years later, the technological and social landscape has changed completely. However, on major points the FSF still seems to live in the old days. The Freedom part of the Software is still viewed from a personal [[wp>Civil_libertarianism|Civil Libertarian]] perspective and, despite the current age of social media, is devoid of any social prescription. And the pun term copy-left still has nothing to do with left wing politics but simply is the literal opposite of copy-right. Freedom according to FSF is about unrestricted access to software source code as opposed to proprietary software that is published as binary executable without underlying source code. In short, the much-cited [[https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html|Four Freedoms]] are about the free exchange of information1, it is not about how information is //applied//. | The Free Software Foundation (FSF) was founded in the mid eighties with Personal Computing becoming mainstream. In that context Free Software and the GPL made perfect sense. Thirty-five years later, the technological and social landscape has changed completely. However, on major points the FSF still seems to live in the old days. The Freedom part of the Software is still viewed from a personal [[wp>Civil_libertarianism|Civil Libertarian]] perspective and, despite the current age of social media, is devoid of any social prescription. And the pun term copy-left still has nothing to do with left wing politics but simply is the literal opposite of copy-right. Freedom according to FSF is about unrestricted access to software source code as opposed to proprietary software that is published as binary executable without underlying source code. In short, the much-cited [[https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html|Four Freedoms]] are about the free exchange of information1, it is not about how information is //applied//. |
| |
| In the nineties the social void of Free Software was filled by the [[https://opensource.org/|Open Source Initiative]]. Because the word “free” does not sound like a way to make profit, the term Open Source was coined to gain acceptance and support from corporate. The Open Source brand covers a very broad software license that makes source code available with relaxed or even non-existent restrictions on its use and modification. This is an explicit “feature” in order to enable the rapid evolution of the software. Open Source is libertarianism on steroids and the ultimate freeway to produce software products and services for Free Market sales. In short, Open Source is a community driven method to efficiently create software for accidental freedom fun but mainly for profit. | In the nineties the social void of Free Software was filled by the [[https://opensource.org/|Open Source Initiative]]. Because the word “free” does not sound like a way to make profit, the term Open Source was coined to gain acceptance and support from corporate. The Open Source brand covers a very broad spectrum of software license that makes source code available with relaxed or even non-existent restrictions on its use and modification. This is an explicit “feature” in order to enable the rapid evolution of the software. Open Source is libertarianism on steroids and the ultimate freeway to produce software products and services for Free Market sales. In short, Open Source is a community driven method to efficiently create software for accidental freedom fun but mainly for profit. |
| |
| The enormous success of Open Source has marginalized the voice of freedom advocated by the FSF. While Silicon Valley and Wall Street are served with unlimited libertarian freedom, at the same time these actors kill user freedom on an unprecedented scale. You could say that the trick to fight copyright by using copyright law itself, is neatly applied to the Free Market by Open Source simply by taking the liberty. To paraphrase Karl Popper's [[wp>Paradox_of_tolerance|Paradox of Tolerance]] : //“If freedom is exercised without limit, freedom will eventually be seized or destroyed by the ones who aim to restrict it”.// | The enormous success of Open Source has marginalized the voice of freedom advocated by the FSF. While Silicon Valley and Wall Street are served with unlimited libertarian freedom, at the same time these actors kill user freedom on an unprecedented scale. You could say that the trick to fight copyright by using copyright law itself, is neatly applied to the Free Market by Open Source simply by taking the liberty. To paraphrase Karl Popper's [[wp>Paradox_of_tolerance|Paradox of Tolerance]] : //“If freedom is exercised without limit, freedom will eventually be seized or destroyed by the ones who aim to restrict it”.// |