summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/network-services-arent-free-or-nonfree.html
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat (limited to 'talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/network-services-arent-free-or-nonfree.html')
-rw-r--r--talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/network-services-arent-free-or-nonfree.html201
1 files changed, 201 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/network-services-arent-free-or-nonfree.html b/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/network-services-arent-free-or-nonfree.html
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..8f5200c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/network-services-arent-free-or-nonfree.html
@@ -0,0 +1,201 @@
+<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" -->
+<!-- Parent-Version: 1.86 -->
+<title>Network Services Aren't Free or Nonfree; They Raise Other Issues
+- GNU Project - Free Software Foundation</title>
+<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/network-services-arent-free-or-nonfree.translist" -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" -->
+
+<h2>Network Services Aren't Free or Nonfree; They Raise Other Issues</h2>
+
+<p>by <a href="http://www.stallman.org/">Richard Stallman</a></p>
+
+<p><strong>Programs and services are different kinds of entities. A
+program is a work that you can execute; a service is an activity that
+you might interact with.</strong></p>
+
+<p>For programs, we make a distinction between free and nonfree
+(proprietary). More precisely, this distinction applies to a program
+that you have a copy of: either
+you <a href="/philosophy/free-sw.html"> have the four freedoms for
+your copy</a> or you don't.</p>
+
+<p>An activity (such as a service) doesn't exist in the form of
+copies, so it's not possible for a user to have a copy of it, let alone
+make more copies. As a result, the four freedoms that define free
+software don't make sense for services.</p>
+
+<p>To use a culinary analogy, my cooking can't be a copy of your
+cooking, not even if I learned to cook by watching you. I might have
+and use a copy of the <em>recipe</em> you use to do your cooking,
+because a recipe, like a program, is a work and exists in copies, but
+the recipe is not the same as the cooking. (And neither of those is
+the same as the food produced by the cooking.)</p>
+
+<p>With today's technology, services are often implemented by running
+programs on computers, but that is not the only way to implement them.
+(In fact, there are network services that are implemented by asking
+human beings to enter responses to questions.) In any case, the
+implementation is not visible to users of the service, so it has no
+direct effect on them.</p>
+
+<p>A network service can raise issues of free vs nonfree software for
+its users through the client software needed to use it. If the service
+requires using a nonfree client program, use of the service requires
+ceding your freedom to that program. With many web services, the
+nonfree software is <a href="/philosophy/javascript-trap.html">
+JavaScript code</a> silently installed in the user's
+browser. The <a href="/software/librejs">GNU LibreJS</a> program makes
+it easier to refuse to run this nonfree JavaScript code. But the issue
+of the client software is logically separate from the service as
+such.</p>
+
+<p>There is one case where a service is directly comparable to a
+program: when using the service is equivalent to having a copy of a
+hypothetical program and running it yourself. In this case, we call it Service as
+a Software Substitute, or <abbr title="Service as a Software
+Substitute">SaaSS</abbr> (we coined that to be less vague and
+general than &ldquo;Software as a Service&rdquo;), and such a service
+is always a bad thing. The job it does is the users' own computing,
+and the users ought to have full control over that. The way for users
+to have control over their own computing is to do it by running their
+own copies of a free program. Using someone else's server to do that
+computing implies losing control of it.</p>
+
+<p>SaaSS is equivalent to using a nonfree program with surveillance features
+and a universal back door, so <a
+href="/philosophy/who-does-that-server-really-serve.html">you should reject
+it and replace it with a free program</a> that does the same job.</p>
+
+<p>However, most services' principal functions are communicating or
+publishing information; they are nothing like running any program
+yourself, so they are not SaaSS. They could not be replaced by your copy of a
+program, either; a program running in your own computers, used solely
+by you and isolated from others, is not communicating with anyone else.</p>
+
+<p>A non-SaaSS service can mistreat users by doing something
+specific and unjust to the user. For instance, it could misuse the
+data users send it, or collect too much data (surveillance). It could be
+designed to mislead or cheat users (for instance, with &ldquo;dark
+patterns&rdquo;). It could impose antisocial or unjust usage
+conditions.
+The <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20090124084811/http://autonomo.us/2008/07/franklin-street-statement/">Franklin
+Street Statement</a> made a stab at addressing these issues, but we
+don't have full understanding of them as yet. What's clear is that the
+issues about a service are <em>different</em> from the issues about a
+program. Thus, for clarity's sake, it is better not to apply the terms
+&ldquo;free&rdquo; and &ldquo;nonfree&rdquo; to a service.</p>
+
+<p>Let's suppose a service is implemented using software: the server
+operator has copies of many programs, and runs them to implement the
+service. These copies may be free software or not. If the operator
+developed them and uses them without distributing copies, they are
+free in a trivial sense since every user (there's only one) has the
+four freedoms.</p>
+
+<p>If some of them are nonfree, that usually doesn't directly affect
+users of the service. They are not running those programs; the service
+operator is running them. In a special situation, these programs can
+indirectly affect the users of the service: if the service holds
+private information, users might be concerned that nonfree programs on
+the server might have back doors allowing someone else to see their
+data. In effect, nonfree programs on the server require users to trust
+those programs' developers as well as the service operator. How
+significant this is in practice depends on the details, including what
+jobs the nonfree programs do.</p>
+
+<p>However, the one party that is <em>certainly</em> mistreated by the
+nonfree programs implementing the service is the server operator
+herself. We don't condemn the server operator for being at the mercy
+of nonfree software, and we certainly don't boycott her for this.
+Rather, we are concerned for her freedom, as with any user of nonfree
+software. Given an opportunity, we try to explain how it curtails her
+freedom, hoping she will switch to free software.</p>
+
+<p>Conversely, if the service operator runs GNU/Linux or other free
+software, that's not a virtue that affects you, but rather a benefit
+for her. We don't praise or thank her for this; rather we felicitate
+her for making the wise choice.</p>
+
+<p>If she has developed some software for the service, and released it
+as free software, that's the point at which we have a reason to thank
+her. We suggest releasing these programs under
+the <a href="/licenses/license-recommendations.html">GNU Affero
+GPL</a>, since evidently they are useful on servers.</p>
+
+<p><a href="/licenses/why-affero-gpl.html">Why the Affero
+GPL?</a></p>
+
+<p>Thus, we don't have a rule that free systems shouldn't use (or
+shouldn't depend on) services (or sites) implemented with nonfree
+software. However, they should not depend on, suggest or encourage use
+of services which are SaaSS; use of SaaSS needs to be replaced by use
+of free software. All else being equal, it is good to favor those
+service providers who contribute to the community by releasing useful
+free software, and good to favor peer-to-peer communication over
+server-based centralized communication, for activities that don't
+inherently require a central hub.</p>
+
+</div><!-- for id="content", starts in the include above -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
+<div id="footer">
+<div class="unprintable">
+
+<p>Please send general FSF &amp; GNU inquiries to
+<a href="mailto:gnu@gnu.org">&lt;gnu@gnu.org&gt;</a>.
+There are also <a href="/contact/">other ways to contact</a>
+the FSF. Broken links and other corrections or suggestions can be sent
+to <a href="mailto:webmasters@gnu.org">&lt;webmasters@gnu.org&gt;</a>.</p>
+
+<p><!-- TRANSLATORS: Ignore the original text in this paragraph,
+ replace it with the translation of these two:
+
+ We work hard and do our best to provide accurate, good quality
+ translations. However, we are not exempt from imperfection.
+ Please send your comments and general suggestions in this regard
+ to <a href="mailto:web-translators@gnu.org">
+ &lt;web-translators@gnu.org&gt;</a>.</p>
+
+ <p>For information on coordinating and submitting translations of
+ our web pages, see <a
+ href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
+ README</a>. -->
+Please see the <a
+href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
+README</a> for information on coordinating and submitting translations
+of this article.</p>
+</div>
+
+<!-- Regarding copyright, in general, standalone pages (as opposed to
+ files generated as part of manuals) on the GNU web server should
+ be under CC BY-ND 4.0. Please do NOT change or remove this
+ without talking with the webmasters or licensing team first.
+ Please make sure the copyright date is consistent with the
+ document. For web pages, it is ok to list just the latest year the
+ document was modified, or published.
+
+ If you wish to list earlier years, that is ok too.
+ Either "2001, 2002, 2003" or "2001-2003" are ok for specifying
+ years, as long as each year in the range is in fact a copyrightable
+ year, i.e., a year in which the document was published (including
+ being publicly visible on the web or in a revision control system).
+
+ There is more detail about copyright years in the GNU Maintainers
+ Information document, www.gnu.org/prep/maintain. -->
+
+<p>Copyright &copy; 2012, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2020 Free Software Foundation, Inc.</p>
+
+<p>This page is licensed under a <a rel="license"
+href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">Creative
+Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.</p>
+
+<!--#include virtual="/server/bottom-notes.html" -->
+
+<p class="unprintable">Updated:
+<!-- timestamp start -->
+$Date: 2020/01/07 16:54:09 $
+<!-- timestamp end -->
+</p>
+</div>
+</div><!-- for class="inner", starts in the banner include -->
+</body>
+</html>