diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/scrap1_16.html')
-rw-r--r-- | talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/scrap1_16.html | 961 |
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 961 deletions
diff --git a/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/scrap1_16.html b/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/scrap1_16.html deleted file mode 100644 index e27cc40..0000000 --- a/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/scrap1_16.html +++ /dev/null @@ -1,961 +0,0 @@ -<!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected Essays of Richard M. Stallman. - -Free Software Foundation - -51 Franklin Street, Fifth Floor - -Boston, MA 02110-1335 -Copyright C 2002, 2010 Free Software Foundation, Inc. -Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire book are permitted -worldwide, without royalty, in any medium, provided this notice is -preserved. Permission is granted to copy and distribute translations -of this book from the original English into another language provided -the translation has been approved by the Free Software Foundation and -the copyright notice and this permission notice are preserved on all -copies. - -ISBN 978-0-9831592-0-9 -Cover design by Rob Myers. - -Cover photograph by Peter Hinely. - --> - - - <a name="Words-to-Avoid-_0028or-Use-with-Care_0029--Because-They-Are-Loaded-or-Confusing"> - </a> - <h1 class="chapter"> - 16. Words to Avoid (or Use with Care) Because They Are Loaded or Confusing - </h1> - <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-use-correct-terminology-_0028see-also-terminology_0029-7"> - </a> - <a name="index-terminology_002c-importance-of-using-correct-7"> - </a> - <p> - There are a number of words and phrases that we recommend avoiding, or -avoiding in certain contexts and usages. Some are ambiguous or -misleading; others presuppose a viewpoint that we hope you disagree -with. (See also “Categories of Free and Nonfree Software,” on -p. @refx{Categories-pg}{.) - </p> - <a name="BSD_002dStyle"> - </a> - <h3 class="subheading"> - BSD-Style - </h3> - <a name="index-_0060_0060BSD_002dstyle_002c_0027_0027-problematic-term"> - </a> - <p> - The expression “BSD-style license” leads to confusion because it -lumps together licenses that have important differences. For instance, -the original - <a name="index-BSD-licenses-_0028see-also-both-_0060_0060BSD_002dstyle_0027_0027-and-GPL_0029-1"> - </a> - <a name="index-GPL_002c-BSD-license-and"> - </a> - BSD license with the advertising clause is incompatible with the GNU -General Public License, but the revised BSD license is compatible with -the GPL. - </p> - <p> - To avoid confusion, it is best to name the specific license in -question and avoid the vague term “BSD-style.” - </p> - <a name="Closed"> - </a> - <h3 class="subheading"> - Closed - </h3> - <a name="index-_0060_0060closed_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term"> - </a> - <p> - Describing nonfree software as “closed” clearly refers to the term -“open source.” In the free software movement, we do not want to be -confused with the open source camp, so we are careful to avoid saying -things that would encourage people to lump us in with them. For -instance, we avoid describing nonfree software as “closed.” We call -it “nonfree” or “proprietary.” - </p> - <p> - @vglue -13pt@null - <a name="Cloud-Computing"> - </a> - </p> - <h3 class="subheading"> - Cloud Computing - </h3> - <a name="index-_0060_0060cloud-computing_002c_0027_0027-avoid-use-of-term"> - </a> - <p> - The term “cloud computing” is a marketing buzzword with no clear -meaning. It is used for a range of different activities whose only -common characteristic is that they use the Internet for something -beyond transmitting files. Thus, the term is a nexus of confusion. If -you base your thinking on it, your thinking will be vague. - </p> - <p> - When thinking about or responding to a statement someone else has made -using this term, the first step is to clarify the topic. Which kind of -activity is the statement really about, and what is a good, clear term -for that activity? Once the topic is clear, the discussion can head -for a useful conclusion. - </p> - <p> - Curiously, - <a name="index-Ellison_002c-Larry"> - </a> - Larry Ellison, a proprietary software - <a name="index-developers_002c-proprietary-software-2"> - </a> - developer, also noted the vacuity of the term “cloud -computing.” - <a href="#FOOT32" name="DOCF32"> - (32) - </a> - He decided to use the term anyway -{@parfillskip=0pt@parbecause, as a proprietary software developer, he isn’t motivated by -the same ideals as we are. - </p> - <a name="Commercial"> - </a> - <h3 class="subheading"> - Commercial - </h3> - <a name="index-commercial-software-_0028see-also-software_0029-1"> - </a> - <a name="index-_0060_0060commercial_002c_0027_0027-problematic-use-of-term"> - </a> - <a name="index-software_002c-commercial-_0028see-also-commercial-software_0029-1"> - </a> - <p> - Please don’t use “commercial” as a synonym for “nonfree.” That -confuses two entirely different issues. - </p> - <p> - A program is commercial if it is developed as a business activity. A -commercial program can be free or nonfree, depending on its manner of -distribution. Likewise, a program developed by a school or an -individual can be free or nonfree, depending on its manner of -distribution. The two questions—what sort of entity developed the -program and what freedom its users have—are independent. - </p> - <a name="index-universities-1"> - </a> - <p> - In the first decade of the free software movement, free software -packages were almost always noncommercial; the components of the -GNU/Linux operating system were developed by individuals or by -nonprofit organizations such as the FSF and universities. Later, in -the 1990s, free commercial software started to appear. - </p> - <p> - Free commercial software is a contribution to our community, so we -should encourage it. But people who think that “commercial” means -“nonfree” will tend to think that the “free commercial” -combination is self-contradictory, and dismiss the possibility. Let’s -be careful not to use the word “commercial” in that way. - </p> - <a name="Compensation"> - </a> - <h3 class="subheading"> - Compensation - </h3> - <a name="index-_0060_0060compensation_002c_0027_0027-false-assumptions-connected-to-term"> - </a> - <a name="index-copyright_002c-false-assumptions-related-to-_0060_0060compensation_0027_0027-for-authors"> - </a> - <p> - To speak of “compensation for authors” in connection with copyright -carries the assumptions that (1) copyright exists for the sake of -authors and (2) whenever we read something, we take on a debt to the -author which we must then repay. The first assumption is simply false, -and the second is outrageous. - </p> - <a name="Consumer"> - </a> - <h3 class="subheading"> - Consumer - </h3> - <a name="index-_0060_0060consumer_002c_0027_0027-problematic-use-of-term-_0028see-also-_0060_0060open-source_0027_0027_0029"> - </a> - <p> - The term “consumer,” when used to refer to computer users, is loaded -with assumptions we should reject. Playing a digital recording, or -running a program, does not consume it. - </p> - <p> - The terms “producer” and “consumer” come from economic theory, and -bring with them its narrow perspective and misguided assumptions. They -tend to warp your thinking. - </p> - <p> - In addition, describing the users of software as “consumers” -presumes a narrow role for them: it regards them as cattle that -passively graze on what others make available to them. - </p> - <p> - This kind of thinking leads to travesties like the - <a name="index-Consumer-Broadband-and-Digital-Television-Promotion-Act-_0028CBDTPA_0029"> - </a> - CBDTPA, the “Consumer Broadband and Digital Television Promotion Act,” -which would require copying restriction facilities in every digital -device. If all the users do is “consume,” then why should they mind? - </p> - <p> - The shallow economic conception of users as “consumers” tends to go -hand in hand with the idea that published works are mere “content.” - </p> - <p> - To describe people who are not limited to passive use of works, we -suggest terms such as “individuals” and “citizens.” - </p> - <a name="Content"> - </a> - <h3 class="subheading"> - Content - </h3> - <a name="index-_0060_0060content_002c_0027_0027-problematic-use-of-term"> - </a> - <p> - If you want to describe a feeling of comfort and satisfaction, by all -means say you are “content,” but using the word as a noun to -describe written and other works of authorship adopts an attitude you -might rather avoid. It regards these works as a commodity whose -purpose is to fill a box and make money. In effect, it disparages the -works themselves. - </p> - <p> - Those who use this term are often the publishers that push for -increased copyright power in the name of the authors (“creators,” as -they say) of the works. The term “content” reveals their real -attitude towards these works and their authors. (See - <a name="index-Love_002c-Courtney"> - </a> - Courtney -Love’s open letter to - <a name="index-Case_002c-Steve"> - </a> - Steve Case - <a href="#FOOT33" name="DOCF33"> - (33) - </a> - and search for “content provider” in that page. Alas, Ms. Love is -unaware that the term - <a name="index-_0060_0060intellectual-property_002c_0027_0027-bias-and-fallacy-of-term-_0028see-also-ownership_0029-5"> - </a> - “intellectual property” is also biased and confusing.) - </p> - <p> - However, as long as other people use the term “content provider,” -political dissidents can well call themselves “malcontent -providers.” - </p> - <p> - The term “content management” takes the prize for vacuity. -“Content” means “some sort of information,” and “management” in -this context means “doing something with it.” So a “content -management system” is a system for doing something to some sort of -information. Nearly all programs fit that description. - </p> - <p> - In most cases, that term really refers to a system for updating pages -on a web site. For that, we recommend the term “web site revision -system” (WRS). - </p> - <a name="Creator"> - </a> - <h3 class="subheading"> - Creator - </h3> - <a name="index-copyright_002c-_0060_0060creator_0027_0027"> - </a> - <a name="index-_0060_0060creator_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term"> - </a> - <p> - The term “creator” as applied to authors implicitly compares them to -a deity (“the creator”). The term is used by publishers to elevate -authors’ moral standing above that of ordinary people in order to -justify giving them increased copyright power, which the publishers -can then exercise in their name. We recommend saying “author” -instead. However, in many cases “copyright holder” is what you -really mean. - </p> - <a name="Digital-Goods"> - </a> - <h3 class="subheading"> - Digital Goods - </h3> - <a name="index-_0060_0060digital-goods_002c_0027_0027-problematic-term"> - </a> - <p> - The term “digital goods,” as applied to copies of works of -authorship, erroneously identifies them with physical goods—which -cannot be copied, and which therefore have to be manufactured and -sold. - </p> - <a name="Digital-Rights-Management"> - </a> - <h3 class="subheading"> - Digital Rights Management - </h3> - <a name="index-DRM_002c-call-it-_0060_0060Digital-Restrictions-Management_0027_0027"> - </a> - <a name="index-_0060_0060Digital-Rights-Management_002c_0027_0027-avoid-use-of-term-_0028see-also-DRM_0029"> - </a> - <p> - “Digital Rights Management” refers to technical schemes designed to -impose restrictions on computer users. The use of the word “rights” -in this term is propaganda, designed to lead you unawares into seeing -the issue from the viewpoint of the few that impose the restrictions, -and ignoring that of the general public on whom these restrictions are -imposed. - </p> - <p> - Good alternatives include “Digital Restrictions Management,” and -“digital handcuffs.” - </p> - <a name="Ecosystem"> - </a> - <h3 class="subheading"> - Ecosystem - </h3> - <a name="index-_0060_0060ecosystem_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-description-of-free-software-community"> - </a> - <p> - It is a mistake to describe the free software community, or any human -community, as an “ecosystem,” because that word implies the absence -of ethical judgment. - </p> - <p> - The term “ecosystem” implicitly suggests an attitude of -nonjudgmental observation: don’t ask how what - <em> - should - </em> - happen, -just study and explain what - <em> - does - </em> - happen. In an ecosystem, some -organisms consume other organisms. We do not ask whether it is fair -for an owl to eat a mouse or for a mouse to eat a plant, we only -observe that they do so. Species’ populations grow or shrink according -to the conditions; this is neither right nor wrong, merely an -ecological phenomenon. - </p> - <p> - By contrast, beings that adopt an ethical stance towards their -surroundings can decide to preserve things that, on their own, might -vanish—such as civil society, democracy, human rights, peace, public -health, clean air and water, endangered species, traditional -arts…and computer users’ freedom. - </p> - <a name="For-Free"> - </a> - <h3 class="subheading"> - For Free - </h3> - <a name="index-_0060_0060for-free_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term"> - </a> - <p> - If you want to say that a program is free software, please don’t say -that it is available “for free.” That term specifically means “for -zero price.” Free software is a matter of freedom, not price. - </p> - <p> - Free software copies are often available for free—for example, by -downloading via FTP. But free software copies are also available for a -price on CD-ROMs; meanwhile, proprietary software copies are -occasionally available for free in promotions, and some proprietary -packages are normally available at no charge to certain users. - </p> - <p> - To avoid confusion, you can say that the program is available -“as free software.” - </p> - <a name="Freely-Available"> - </a> - <h3 class="subheading"> - Freely Available - </h3> - <a name="index-_0060_0060freely-available_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term"> - </a> - <p> - Don’t use “freely available software” as a synonym for “free -software.” The terms are not equivalent. Software is “freely -available” if anyone can easily get a copy. “Free software” is -defined in terms of the freedom of users that have a copy of it. These -are answers to different questions. - </p> - <a name="Freeware-1"> - </a> - <h3 class="subheading"> - Freeware - </h3> - <a name="index-freeware-_0028see-also-software_0029-1"> - </a> - <p> - Please don’t use the term “freeware” as a synonym for “free -software.” The term “freeware” was used often in the 1980s for -programs released only as executables, with source code not -available. Today it has no particular agreed-on definition. - </p> - <p> - When using languages other than English, please avoid borrowing -English terms such as “free software” or “freeware.” It is better -to translate the term “free software” into your language. (Please -see p. @refx{FS Translations-pg}{ for a list of recommended unambiguous -translations for the term “free software” into various languages.) - </p> - <p> - By using a word in your own language, you show that you are really -referring to freedom and not just parroting some mysterious foreign -marketing concept. The reference to freedom may at first seem strange -or disturbing to your compatriots, but once they see that it means -exactly what it says, they will really understand what the issue is. - </p> - <a name="Give-Away-Software"> - </a> - <h3 class="subheading"> - Give Away Software - </h3> - <a name="index-_0060_0060give-away-software_002c_0027_0027-misleading-use-of-term-1"> - </a> - <p> - It’s misleading to use the term “give away” to mean “distribute a -program as free software.” This locution has the same problem as -“for free”: it implies the issue is price, not freedom. One way to -avoid the confusion is to say “release as free software.” - </p> - <a name="Hacker"> - </a> - <h3 class="subheading"> - Hacker - </h3> - <a name="index-hackers-7"> - </a> - <a name="index-_0060_0060hacker_002c_0027_0027-actual-meaning-of-term-_0028see-also-_0060_0060cracker_0027_0027_0029-1"> - </a> - <a name="index-MIT-5"> - </a> - <p> - A hacker is someone who enjoys playful cleverness - <a href="#FOOT34" name="DOCF34"> - (34) - </a> - —not -necessarily with computers. The programmers in the old MIT free -software community of the 60s and 70s referred to themselves as -hackers. Around 1980, journalists who discovered the hacker community -mistakenly took the term to mean “security breaker.” - </p> - <p> - Please don’t spread this mistake. People who break security are -“crackers.” - </p> - <a name="Intellectual-Property"> - </a> - <h3 class="subheading"> - Intellectual Property - </h3> - <a name="index-_0060_0060intellectual-property_002c_0027_0027-bias-and-fallacy-of-term-_0028see-also-ownership_0029-6"> - </a> - <a name="index-trademarks-and_002for-trademark-law-1"> - </a> - <p> - Publishers and lawyers like to describe copyright as “intellectual -property”—a term also applied to patents, trademarks, and other -more obscure areas of law. These laws have so little in common, and -differ so much, that it is ill-advised to generalize about them. It is -best to talk specifically about “copyright,” or about “patents,” -or about “trademarks.” - </p> - <p> - The term “intellectual property” carries a hidden assumption—that -the way to think about all these disparate issues is based on an -analogy with physical objects, and our conception of them as physical -property. - </p> - <p> - When it comes to copying, this analogy disregards the crucial -difference between material objects and information: information can -be copied and shared almost effortlessly, while material objects can’t -be. - </p> - <p> - To avoid spreading unnecessary bias and confusion, it is best to adopt -a firm policy not to speak or even think in terms of “intellectual -property.” - </p> - <p> - The hypocrisy of calling these powers “rights” is starting to make -the - <a name="index-World-_0060_0060Intellectual-Property_0027_0027-Organization-_0028WIPO_0029-_0028see-also-_0060_0060intellectual-property_0027_0027_0029-2"> - </a> - World “Intellectual Property” Organization embarrassed. - </p> - <a name="LAMP-System"> - </a> - <h3 class="subheading"> - LAMP System - </h3> - <a name="index-_0060_0060LAMP-system_002c_0027_0027-problematic-term-_0028see-also-GLAMP_0029"> - </a> - <p> - “LAMP” stands for “Linux, Apache, MySQL and PHP”—a common -combination of software to use on a web server, except that “Linux” -in this context really refers to the GNU/Linux system. So instead of -“LAMP” it should be - <a name="index-GLAMP-_0028GNU_002c-Linux_002c-Apache_002c-MySQL-and-PHP_0029-system"> - </a> - <a name="index-GNU_002c-GLAMP-_0028GNU_002c-Linux_002c-Apache_002c-MySQL-and-PHP_0029-system"> - </a> - “GLAMP”: “GNU, Linux, Apache, MySQL and PHP.” - </p> - <a name="Linux-System"> - </a> - <h3 class="subheading"> - Linux System - </h3> - <a name="index-_0060_0060Linux-system_002c_0027_0027-avoid-use-of-term"> - </a> - <a name="index-Torvalds_002c-Linus-1"> - </a> - <a name="index-GNU_002c-GNU-Project-7"> - </a> - <a name="index-kernel_002c-Linux-1"> - </a> - <a name="index-Linux-kernel-1"> - </a> - <a name="index-_0060_0060Linux_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term-_0028see-also-open-source_0029-3"> - </a> - <p> - Linux is the name of the kernel that Linus Torvalds developed starting -in 1991. The operating system in which Linux is used is basically GNU -with Linux added. To call the whole system “Linux” is both unfair -and confusing. Please call the complete system GNU/Linux, both to give -the GNU Project credit and to distinguish the whole system from the -kernel alone. - </p> - <a name="Market"> - </a> - <h3 class="subheading"> - Market - </h3> - <a name="index-_0060_0060market_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term"> - </a> - <p> - It is misleading to describe the users of free software, or the -software users in general, as a “market.” - </p> - <p> - This is not to say there is no room for markets in the free software -community. If you have a free software support business, then you -have clients, and you trade with them in a market. As long as you -respect their freedom, we wish you success in your market. - </p> - <p> - But the free software movement is a social movement, not a business, -and the success it aims for is not a market success. We are trying to -serve the public by giving it freedom—not competing to draw business -away from a rival. To equate this campaign for freedom to a business’ -efforts for mere success is to deny the importance of freedom and -legitimize proprietary software. - </p> - <a name="MP3-Player"> - </a> - <h3 class="subheading"> - MP3 Player - </h3> - <a name="index-_0060_0060MP3-Player_002c_0027_0027-problematic-use-of-term"> - </a> - <a name="index-MP3-1"> - </a> - <a name="index-Ogg-Vorbis"> - </a> - <a name="index-FLAC"> - </a> - <p> - In the late 1990s it became feasible to make portable, solid-state -digital audio players. Most support the patented MP3 codec, but not -all. Some support the patent-free audio codecs Ogg Vorbis and FLAC, -and may not even support MP3-encoded files at all, precisely to avoid -these patents. To call such players “MP3 players” is not only -confusing, it also puts MP3 in an undeserved position of privilege -which encourages people to continue using that vulnerable format. We -suggest the terms “digital audio player,” or simply “audio player” -if context permits. - </p> - <a name="Open"> - </a> - <h3 class="subheading"> - Open - </h3> - <a name="index-_0060_0060open_002c_0027_0027-misleading-use-of-term-1"> - </a> - <p> - Please avoid using the term “open” or “open source” as a -substitute for “free software.” Those terms refer to a different -position based on different values. Free software is a political -movement; open source is a development model. - </p> - <p> - When referring to the open source position, using its name is -appropriate; but please do not use it to label us or our work—that -leads people to think we share those views. - </p> - <a name="PC"> - </a> - <h3 class="subheading"> - PC - </h3> - <a name="index-_0060_0060PC_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term"> - </a> - <p> - It’s OK to use the abbreviation “PC” to refer to a certain kind of -computer hardware, but please don’t use it with the implication that -the computer is running Microsoft - <a name="index-Windows-1"> - </a> - Windows. If you install GNU/Linux on the same computer, it is still a -PC. - </p> - <p> - The term “WC” has been suggested for a computer running Windows. - </p> - <a name="Photoshop"> - </a> - <h3 class="subheading"> - Photoshop - </h3> - <a name="index-_0060_0060photoshop_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term"> - </a> - <p> - Please avoid using the term “photoshop” as a verb, meaning any kind -of photo manipulation or image editing in general. Photoshop is just -the name of one particular image editing program, which should be -avoided since it is proprietary. There are plenty of free -alternatives, such as - <a name="index-GIMP"> - </a> - <a name="index-GNU_002c-GIMP"> - </a> - GIMP. - </p> - <a name="Piracy"> - </a> - <h3 class="subheading"> - Piracy - </h3> - <a name="index-_0060_0060piracy_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term-4"> - </a> - <p> - Publishers often refer to copying they don’t approve of as “piracy.” -In this way, they imply that it is ethically equivalent to attacking -ships on the high seas, kidnapping and murdering the people on -them. Based on such propaganda, they have procured laws in most of the -world to forbid copying in most (or sometimes all) -circumstances. (They are still pressuring to make these prohibitions -more complete.) - </p> - <p> - If you don’t believe that copying not approved by the publisher is -just like kidnapping and murder, you might prefer not to use the word -“piracy” to describe it. Neutral terms such as “unauthorized -copying” (or “prohibited copying” for the situation where it is -illegal) are available for use instead. Some of us might even prefer -to use a positive term such as “sharing information with your -neighbor.” - </p> - <a name="PowerPoint"> - </a> - <h3 class="subheading"> - PowerPoint - </h3> - <a name="index-_0060_0060PowerPoint_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term"> - </a> - <p> - Please avoid using the term “PowerPoint” to mean any kind of slide -presentation. “PowerPoint” is just the name of one particular -proprietary program to make presentations, and there are plenty of -free alternatives, such as - <a name="index-TeX-3"> - </a> - TeX’s - <a name="index-beamer-class_002c-TeX"> - </a> - <tt> - beamer - </tt> - class -and - <a name="index-OpenOffice_002eorg"> - </a> - OpenOffice.org’s - <a name="index-Impress_002c-OpenOffice_002eorg"> - </a> - Impress. - </p> - <a name="Protection"> - </a> - <h3 class="subheading"> - Protection - </h3> - <a name="index-copyright_002c-_0060_0060protection_0027_0027"> - </a> - <a name="index-_0060_0060protection_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term"> - </a> - <p> - Publishers’ lawyers love to use the term “protection” to describe -copyright. This word carries the implication of preventing destruction -or suffering; therefore, it encourages people to identify with the -owner and publisher who benefit from copyright, rather than with the -users who are restricted by it. - </p> - <p> - It is easy to avoid “protection” and use neutral terms instead. For -example, instead of saying, “Copyright protection lasts a very long -time,” you can say, “Copyright lasts a very long time.” - </p> - <p> - If you want to criticize copyright instead of supporting it, you can -use the term “copyright restrictions.” Thus, you can say, -“Copyright restrictions last a very long time.” - </p> - <p> - The term “protection” is also used to describe malicious features. -For instance, “copy protection” is a feature that interferes with -copying. From the user’s point of view, this is obstruction. So we -could call that malicious feature “copy obstruction.” More often it -is called Digital Restrictions Management (DRM)—see the Defective by -Design campaign, at - <a href="http://www.defectivebydesign.org"> - http://www.defectivebydesign.org - </a> - . - </p> - <a name="RAND-_0028Reasonable-and-Non_002dDiscriminatory_0029"> - </a> - <h3 class="subheading"> - RAND (Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory) - </h3> - <a name="index-_0060_0060RAND-_0028Reasonable-and-Non_002dDiscriminatory_0029_002c_0027_0027-avoid-use-of-term-_0028see-also-patents_0029"> - </a> - <p> - Standards bodies that promulgate patent-restricted standards that -prohibit free software typically have a policy of obtaining patent -licenses that require a fixed fee per copy of a conforming program. -They often refer to such licenses by the term “RAND,” which stands -for “reasonable and non-discriminatory.” - </p> - <p> - That term whitewashes a class of patent licenses that are normally -neither reasonable nor nondiscriminatory. It is true that these -licenses do not discriminate against any specific person, but they do -discriminate against the free software community, and that makes them -unreasonable. Thus, half of the term “RAND” is deceptive and the -other half is prejudiced. - </p> - <p> - Standards bodies should recognize that these licenses are -discriminatory, and drop the use of the term “reasonable and -non-discriminatory” or “RAND” to describe them. Until they do so, -writers who do not wish to join in the whitewashing would do well to -reject that term. To accept and use it merely because patent-wielding -companies have made it widespread is to let those companies dictate -the views you express. - </p> - <a name="index-patents_002c-_0060_0060uniform-fee-only_0027_0027"> - </a> - <p> - We suggest the term “uniform fee only,” or “UFO” for short, as a -replacement. It is accurate because the only condition in these -licenses is a uniform royalty fee. - </p> - <a name="Sell-Software"> - </a> - <h3 class="subheading"> - Sell Software - </h3> - <a name="index-selling_002c-_0060_0060sell-software_002c_0027_0027-ambiguous-term"> - </a> - <p> - The term “sell software” is ambiguous. Strictly speaking, exchanging -a copy of a free program for a sum of money is selling; but people -usually associate the term “sell” with proprietary restrictions on -the subsequent use of the software. You can be more precise, and -prevent confusion, by saying either “distributing copies of a program -for a fee” or “imposing proprietary restrictions on the use of a -program,” depending on what you mean. - </p> - <p> - See “Selling Free Software” (p. @refx{Selling-pg}{) for further -discussion of this issue. - </p> - <a name="Software-Industry"> - </a> - <h3 class="subheading"> - Software Industry - </h3> - <a name="index-_0060_0060software-industry_002c_0027_0027-problematic-term"> - </a> - <p> - The term “software industry” encourages people to imagine that -software is always developed by a sort of factory and then delivered -to “consumers.” The free software community shows this is not the -case. Software businesses exist, and various businesses develop free -and/or nonfree software, but those that develop free software are not -run like factories. - </p> - <p> - The term “industry” is being used as propaganda by advocates of -software patents. They call software development “industry” and then -try to argue that this means it should be subject to patent -monopolies. The - <a name="index-European-Parliament"> - </a> - <a name="index-European-Union_002c-proposed-European-Union-software-patents-directive"> - </a> - <a name="index-patents_002c-proposed-European-Union-software-patents-directive"> - </a> - European Parliament, rejecting software patents in -2003, - <a href="#FOOT35" name="DOCF35"> - (35) - </a> - voted to define “industry” as “automated -production of material goods.” - </p> - <a name="Theft"> - </a> - <h3 class="subheading"> - Theft - </h3> - <a name="index-_0060_0060theft_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term-1"> - </a> - <p> - Copyright apologists often use words like “stolen” and “theft” to -describe copyright infringement. At the same time, they ask us to -treat the legal system as an authority on ethics: if copying is -forbidden, it must be wrong. - </p> - <p> - So it is pertinent to mention that the legal system—at least in the -US—rejects the idea that copyright infringement is “theft.” -Copyright apologists are making an appeal to authority…and -misrepresenting what authority says. - </p> - <p> - The idea that laws decide what is right or wrong is mistaken in -general. Laws are, at their best, an attempt to achieve justice; to -say that laws define justice or ethical conduct is turning things -upside down. - </p> - <a name="Trusted-Computing"> - </a> - <h3 class="subheading"> - Trusted Computing - </h3> - <a name="index-_0060_0060trusted-computing_002c_0027_0027-avoid-use-of-term-_0028see-also-treacherous-computing_0029"> - </a> - <p> - “Trusted computing” is the proponents’ name for a scheme to redesign -computers so that application - <a name="index-developers_002c-proprietary-software-3"> - </a> - developers can trust your computer to obey them instead of you. From -their point of view, it is “trusted”; from your point of view, it is - <a name="index-treacherous-computing"> - </a> - “treacherous.” - </p> - <a name="Vendor"> - </a> - <h3 class="subheading"> - Vendor - </h3> - <a name="index-_0060_0060vendor_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term"> - </a> - <p> - Please don’t use the term “vendor” to refer generally to anyone that -develops or packages software. Many programs are developed in order to -sell copies, and their - <a name="index-developers_002c-term-_0060_0060vendor_0027_0027-and"> - </a> - developers are therefore their vendors; this even includes some free -software packages. However, many programs are developed by volunteers -or organizations which do not intend to sell copies. These developers -are not vendors. Likewise, only some of the packagers of GNU/Linux -distributions are vendors. We recommend the general term “supplier” -instead. - </p> - <a name="index-terminology_002c-importance-of-using-correct-8"> - </a> - <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-use-correct-terminology-_0028see-also-terminology_0029-8"> - </a> - <div class="footnote"> - <hr> - <h3> - Footnotes - </h3> - <h3> - <a href="#DOCF32" name="FOOT32"> - (32) - </a> - </h3> - <p> - Dan Farber, “Oracle’s Ellison Nails Cloud -Computing,” 26 September 2008, - <a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-13953_3-10052188-80.html"> - http://news.cnet.com/8301-13953_3-10052188-80.html - </a> - . -@vglue -1pc - </p> - <h3> - <a href="#DOCF33" name="FOOT33"> - (33) - </a> - </h3> - <p> - An unedited transcript of American rock musician -Courtney Love’s 16 May 2000 speech to the Digital Hollywood -online-entertainment conference, in New York, is available at - <a href="http://salon.com/technology/feature/2000/06/14/love/print.html"> - http://salon.com/technology/feature/2000/06/14/love/print.html - </a> - . -@vglue -1pc - </p> - <h3> - <a href="#DOCF34" name="FOOT34"> - (34) - </a> - </h3> - <p> - See my -article, “On Hacking,” at - <a href="http://stallman.org/articles/on-hacking.html"> - http://stallman.org/articles/on-hacking.html - </a> - . -@vglue -1pc - </p> - <h3> - <a href="#DOCF35" name="FOOT35"> - (35) - </a> - </h3> - <p> - “Directive on the patentability of -computer-implemented inventions,” 24 September 2003, - <a href="http://eupat.ffii.org/papers/europarl0309"> - http://eupat.ffii.org/papers/europarl0309 - </a> - . -@vglue -1pc - </p> - </hr> - </div> - <hr size="2"/> - |