العربية
中国
Français
Deutsch
Ελληνική
हिन्दी
Italiano
日本語
Português
Русский
EspañolALTERNATIVE TERMS FOR FREE SOFTWARE
(Redirected from FOSS)
From the early 90s onward, 'alternative terms for free software' have come into common use, with much debate in the free software community. The term "free software" was coined by Richard Stallman in 1983 when he launched the free software movement. Records of published version of its definition can be found dating back to February 1986. The definition can be summarised as software which the user can use for any purpose, study the source code of, adapt to their needs, and redistribute - modified or unmodified.[1] To avoid the ambiguity of the English word "free" (free as in beer versus free as in speech), and to avoid talking about the impact on freedom of non-free software, people have suggested alternative names.
"'Open-source software'", "'Software Libre'", "'FLOSS'" (Free/Libre/Open-Source Software), and "'FOSS'" (Free and Open-Source Software) are the most common alternative terms.A poll at Free Software Magazine with 184 votes (as of March 2007)[1] The most popular of these has been "open-source software".
Users of each of these terms share almost identical licence criteria and development practices, but differ, according to Richard Stallman, in the respective philosophical values. Some people use "libre" (as in free speech) or "gratis" (as in free beer) to avoid the ambiguity of the word "free". However, these terms are mostly used within the free software movement and are slowly spreading. Stallman endorses the terms FLOSS and FOSS to refer to "open source" and "free software" without necessarily choosing between the two camps, but he asks people to consider supporting the "free software" camp.
"Open-source software" was proposed in 1998 as "'' a replacement label''"[2] for "free software". Later that year, Open Source Initiative was founded to promote the term as part of "''a marketing program for free software''".[3]
"Libre software" was first used publicly in 2000, by the European Commission.[4] The word "libre", borrowed from the Spanish and French languages, means having liberty. This avoids the freedom/cost ambiguity of the word "free".
"FLOSS" was used in 2001 as a project acronym by Rishab Aiyer Ghosh as an acronym for 'F'ree/'L'ibre/'O'pen-'S'ource 'S'oftware. Later that year, the European Commission (EC) used the phrase when they funded a study on the topic.[5] "FOSS" has since been used by others with the same meaning. The term FOSS was first formally introduced in the document, ''Use of Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) in the U.S. Department of Defense''.
The term "open source software" was picked during a strategy session held in Palo Alto. Those present included Todd Anderson, Larry Augustin, Jon Hall, Sam Ockman, Christine Peterson, and Eric S. Raymond. The session was arranged in reaction to Netscape's January 1998 announcement of a source code release for Navigator (as Mozilla). It aimed to ease business adoption of free software by getting rid of the zero-cost ambiguity, and to "avoid the political connotations of 'free software'".[6]
Unlike "libre software", which aimed to solve an ambiguity problem, "FLOSS" aimed to avoid taking sides in the debate over whether it was better to say "free software" or to say "open-source software". The L for "libre" was included in the hope that it would clarify that the word "free" referred to freedom, not price.
Proponents of the term point out that parts of the FLOSS acronym can be translated into other European languages, with for example the "F" representing ''free'' (English) or ''frei'' (German), and the "L" representing ''libre'' (Spanish or French), ''livre'' (Portuguese), or ''libero'' (Italian). However, this term is not often used in official, non-English, documents, since the words in these languages for "free as in freedom" do not have the ambiguity problem of English's "free".
By the end of 2004, the FLOSS acronym had been used in official English documents issued by South Africa [7], Spain[8], and Brazil[9].
At roughly the time the article introducing "FOSS" was being written, the similar term "F/OSS" appeared on a Usenet newsgroup dedicated to Amiga computer games .[10] Another abbreviation is OSS/FS, although this hasn't seen much usage outside of the documents of David A. Wheeler.
A variation on FOSS, 'Free/Open Source Software/Code' (FOSSC), is a less notable term used by a software programmer based in New Delhi, India.[11]
Richard Stallman has suggested that the term "unfettered software" would be an appropriate, non-ambiguous replacement, but that he would not push for it because there was too much momentum, and too much effort, behind the term "free software".
The free software community in India sometimes uses the term "swatantra software", despite English being the lingua franca. This term, meaning freedom, comes from Hindi but is also understandable to speakers of other Indian languages, as many of them have common roots in Sanskrit.
In The Philippines, "malayang software" is sometimes used. The word "libre" exists in the Filipino language, and it came from the Spanish language, but has acquired the same ambiguity of the English word "free".
None of these terms, or the term "free software" itself, have been trademarked. Bruce Perens of OSI, attempted to register "open source" as a service mark for OSI in the United States of America, but that attempt failed to meet the relevant trademark standards. OSI claims a trademark on "OSI Certified", and applied for trademark registration, but did not complete the paperwork. The United States Patent and Trademark Office labels it as "abandoned". [12]
While the term "free software" is associated with FSF's definition, and the term "open-source software" is associated with OSI's definition, the other terms have not been claimed by any group in particular. This, however, has not led to confusion since the definitions published by FSF and OSI are practically the same.
All of the terms mentioned here can be used interchangeably, the choice of which to use is mostly political (wanting to support a certain group) or practical (thinking that one term is the clearest).
Most software packages that fall under the names used in this article are under a small set of licences. 50-70% are under the GNU General Public License, and most of the rest are distributed under the terms of the GNU Lesser General Public License, the BSD Licence, the Mozilla Public License, the MIT Licence, and the Apache License, each with a share of between 2% and 10%.[12] All of these licence are accepted by the various de facto and de jure guardians of what each of these terms. Thus, the choice of term has little or no impact on which licences are valid.
Free Software Foundation and Open Source Initiative both publish lists of licences that they accept as complying with their definition of free software and open-source software respectively.
★ List of FSF approved software licences
★ List of OSI approved software licences
Apart from these two organisations, the Debian project is seen by some to provide useful advice on whether particular licences comply with their Debian Free Software Guidelines. Debian doesn't publish a list of "approved" licences, but its judgements can be tracked by checking what licences are used by software they have allowed into their distribution.[13]
There is also a class of software that is covered by the names discussed in this article, but which doesn't have a licence: software for which the source code is in the public domain. The use of such source code, and therefore the executable version, is not restricted by copyright and therefore does not need a free software licence to make it free software.
★ Glossary of legal terms in technology
★ GNU/Linux naming controversy
★ Open source vs. closed source
★ Permissive free software licences
★ History of free software
★ ''Why Free Software is better than Open Source'', a GNU Project essay on the differences between Free Software and Open Source, by Richard Stallman
★ Differences between open source and free software as interpreted by Slackware
★ Berry, D M (2004). The Contestation of Code: A Preliminary Investigation into the Discourse of the Free Software and Open Software Movement, Critical Discourse Studies, Volume 1(1).
★ Stallman discusses the names "open source" and "free software", Tokyo 2006
★ John Stanforth, an Open Source proponent, on the differences between the Open Source Initiative and the Free Software Foundation.
★ EU study which, among other things, polled developers about terminology
★ FSF's suggested translations of free software to languages other than English
1. FSF's free software definition
2. [2]
3. [3]
4. [4]
5. [5]
6. [6]
7. [7]
8. [8]
9. [9]
10. [10]
11. [11]
12. Paper on why GPL-compatibility is important, gives various measurements of what percentage of free software uses each licence
13. Debian's list of licences used in their distro (in the "main" repository)
From the early 90s onward, 'alternative terms for free software' have come into common use, with much debate in the free software community. The term "free software" was coined by Richard Stallman in 1983 when he launched the free software movement. Records of published version of its definition can be found dating back to February 1986. The definition can be summarised as software which the user can use for any purpose, study the source code of, adapt to their needs, and redistribute - modified or unmodified.[1] To avoid the ambiguity of the English word "free" (free as in beer versus free as in speech), and to avoid talking about the impact on freedom of non-free software, people have suggested alternative names.
"'Open-source software'", "'Software Libre'", "'FLOSS'" (Free/Libre/Open-Source Software), and "'FOSS'" (Free and Open-Source Software) are the most common alternative terms.A poll at Free Software Magazine with 184 votes (as of March 2007)[1] The most popular of these has been "open-source software".
Users of each of these terms share almost identical licence criteria and development practices, but differ, according to Richard Stallman, in the respective philosophical values. Some people use "libre" (as in free speech) or "gratis" (as in free beer) to avoid the ambiguity of the word "free". However, these terms are mostly used within the free software movement and are slowly spreading. Stallman endorses the terms FLOSS and FOSS to refer to "open source" and "free software" without necessarily choosing between the two camps, but he asks people to consider supporting the "free software" camp.
| Contents |
| History |
| Minor terms |
| Non-English terms in English speaking regions |
| Ownership and attachments |
| Licences |
| See also |
| External links |
| References |
History
"Open-source software" was proposed in 1998 as "'' a replacement label''"[2] for "free software". Later that year, Open Source Initiative was founded to promote the term as part of "''a marketing program for free software''".[3]
"Libre software" was first used publicly in 2000, by the European Commission.[4] The word "libre", borrowed from the Spanish and French languages, means having liberty. This avoids the freedom/cost ambiguity of the word "free".
"FLOSS" was used in 2001 as a project acronym by Rishab Aiyer Ghosh as an acronym for 'F'ree/'L'ibre/'O'pen-'S'ource 'S'oftware. Later that year, the European Commission (EC) used the phrase when they funded a study on the topic.[5] "FOSS" has since been used by others with the same meaning. The term FOSS was first formally introduced in the document, ''Use of Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) in the U.S. Department of Defense''.
The term "open source software" was picked during a strategy session held in Palo Alto. Those present included Todd Anderson, Larry Augustin, Jon Hall, Sam Ockman, Christine Peterson, and Eric S. Raymond. The session was arranged in reaction to Netscape's January 1998 announcement of a source code release for Navigator (as Mozilla). It aimed to ease business adoption of free software by getting rid of the zero-cost ambiguity, and to "avoid the political connotations of 'free software'".[6]
Unlike "libre software", which aimed to solve an ambiguity problem, "FLOSS" aimed to avoid taking sides in the debate over whether it was better to say "free software" or to say "open-source software". The L for "libre" was included in the hope that it would clarify that the word "free" referred to freedom, not price.
Proponents of the term point out that parts of the FLOSS acronym can be translated into other European languages, with for example the "F" representing ''free'' (English) or ''frei'' (German), and the "L" representing ''libre'' (Spanish or French), ''livre'' (Portuguese), or ''libero'' (Italian). However, this term is not often used in official, non-English, documents, since the words in these languages for "free as in freedom" do not have the ambiguity problem of English's "free".
By the end of 2004, the FLOSS acronym had been used in official English documents issued by South Africa [7], Spain[8], and Brazil[9].
Minor terms
At roughly the time the article introducing "FOSS" was being written, the similar term "F/OSS" appeared on a Usenet newsgroup dedicated to Amiga computer games .[10] Another abbreviation is OSS/FS, although this hasn't seen much usage outside of the documents of David A. Wheeler.
A variation on FOSS, 'Free/Open Source Software/Code' (FOSSC), is a less notable term used by a software programmer based in New Delhi, India.[11]
Richard Stallman has suggested that the term "unfettered software" would be an appropriate, non-ambiguous replacement, but that he would not push for it because there was too much momentum, and too much effort, behind the term "free software".
Non-English terms in English speaking regions
The free software community in India sometimes uses the term "swatantra software", despite English being the lingua franca. This term, meaning freedom, comes from Hindi but is also understandable to speakers of other Indian languages, as many of them have common roots in Sanskrit.
In The Philippines, "malayang software" is sometimes used. The word "libre" exists in the Filipino language, and it came from the Spanish language, but has acquired the same ambiguity of the English word "free".
Ownership and attachments
None of these terms, or the term "free software" itself, have been trademarked. Bruce Perens of OSI, attempted to register "open source" as a service mark for OSI in the United States of America, but that attempt failed to meet the relevant trademark standards. OSI claims a trademark on "OSI Certified", and applied for trademark registration, but did not complete the paperwork. The United States Patent and Trademark Office labels it as "abandoned". [12]
While the term "free software" is associated with FSF's definition, and the term "open-source software" is associated with OSI's definition, the other terms have not been claimed by any group in particular. This, however, has not led to confusion since the definitions published by FSF and OSI are practically the same.
All of the terms mentioned here can be used interchangeably, the choice of which to use is mostly political (wanting to support a certain group) or practical (thinking that one term is the clearest).
Licences
Most software packages that fall under the names used in this article are under a small set of licences. 50-70% are under the GNU General Public License, and most of the rest are distributed under the terms of the GNU Lesser General Public License, the BSD Licence, the Mozilla Public License, the MIT Licence, and the Apache License, each with a share of between 2% and 10%.[12] All of these licence are accepted by the various de facto and de jure guardians of what each of these terms. Thus, the choice of term has little or no impact on which licences are valid.
Free Software Foundation and Open Source Initiative both publish lists of licences that they accept as complying with their definition of free software and open-source software respectively.
★ List of FSF approved software licences
★ List of OSI approved software licences
Apart from these two organisations, the Debian project is seen by some to provide useful advice on whether particular licences comply with their Debian Free Software Guidelines. Debian doesn't publish a list of "approved" licences, but its judgements can be tracked by checking what licences are used by software they have allowed into their distribution.[13]
There is also a class of software that is covered by the names discussed in this article, but which doesn't have a licence: software for which the source code is in the public domain. The use of such source code, and therefore the executable version, is not restricted by copyright and therefore does not need a free software licence to make it free software.
See also
★ Glossary of legal terms in technology
★ GNU/Linux naming controversy
★ Open source vs. closed source
★ Permissive free software licences
★ History of free software
External links
★ ''Why Free Software is better than Open Source'', a GNU Project essay on the differences between Free Software and Open Source, by Richard Stallman
★ Differences between open source and free software as interpreted by Slackware
★ Berry, D M (2004). The Contestation of Code: A Preliminary Investigation into the Discourse of the Free Software and Open Software Movement, Critical Discourse Studies, Volume 1(1).
★ Stallman discusses the names "open source" and "free software", Tokyo 2006
★ John Stanforth, an Open Source proponent, on the differences between the Open Source Initiative and the Free Software Foundation.
★ EU study which, among other things, polled developers about terminology
★ FSF's suggested translations of free software to languages other than English
References
1. FSF's free software definition
2. [2]
3. [3]
4. [4]
5. [5]
6. [6]
7. [7]
8. [8]
9. [9]
10. [10]
11. [11]
12. Paper on why GPL-compatibility is important, gives various measurements of what percentage of free software uses each licence
13. Debian's list of licences used in their distro (in the "main" repository)
This article provided by Wikipedia. To edit the contents of this article, click here for original source.
psst.. try this: add to faves
Featured Companies
| Golf Holidays International | |
| Destinations Unlimited |
Newest Companies
Alternative terms for free software Travel Deals
