34 lines
4.7 KiB
Markdown
34 lines
4.7 KiB
Markdown
|
# Free Software
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Free (as in freedom) software is a type of [software](software.md) that's respecting its users' freedom, generally by availability of its source code and by a [license](license.md) that allows anyone to use, study, modify and share the software. It stands opposed to the [proprietary software](proprietary_software.md). Free software is not to be confused with [freeware](freeware.md) ("gratis", software available for free); although free software is always available for free thanks to its definition, zero price is not its goal. The goal is freedom.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Free software is also known as *free as in freedom* or *free as in speech* software. It is sometimes equated with [open source](open_source.md), even though open source is fundamentally different, or neutrally labelled FOSS (free and open-source software). Software that is gratis is sometimes called *free as in beer*.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
[Richard Stallman](rms.md), the inventor of the concept and the term "free software", says free software is about ensuring the freedom of computer users, i.e. people truly owning their tools -- he points out that unless people have complete control over their tools, they don't truly own them and will instead become controlled and abused by the makers (true owners) of those tools, which in [capitalism](capitalism.md) are [corporations](corporation.md). Richard Stallman stressed that **there is no such thing as partially free software** -- it takes only a single line of code to take away the user's freedom and therefore if software is to be free, it has to be free as a whole. This is in direct contrast with [open source](open_source.md) which happily tolerates for example [Windows](windows.md) only programs and accepts them as "open source", even though such a program cannot be run without the underlying proprietary code of the platform.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
**Is free software [communism](communism.md)?** This is a question often debated by [Americans](usa.md) who have a panic phobia of anything resembling ideas of sharing and giving away for free. The answer is: yes and no. No as in it's not [Marxism](marxism.md), the kind of [evil](evil.md) pseudocommunism that plagued Europe not a long time long ago -- that was a hugely complex, twisted violent ideology encompassing whole society which furthermore betrayed many basic ideas of equality and so on. Compared to this free software is just a simple idea of not applying intellectual property to software, and this idea may well function under some form of early capitalism. But on the other hand yes, free software is communism in its general form that simply states that sharing is good, it is communism as much e.g. charity or teaching a kid to share toys with its siblings.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
# Definition
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Free software was originally defined by [Richard Stallman](rms.md) for his [GNU](gnu.md) project. The definition was subsequently adopted and adjusted by other groups such as [Debian](debian.md) and so nowadays there isn't just one definition, even though the GNU definition is usually implicitly supposed. However, all of these definition are very similar and are basically variations and subsets of the original one. The GNU definition of free software is paraphrased as follows:
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Software is considered free if all its users have the rights to:
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
0. Use the software for any purpose.
|
||
|
|
1. Study the software. For this source code of the program has to be available.
|
||
|
|
2. Share the software with anyone.
|
||
|
|
3. Modify the software. This modified version can also be shared with anyone.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Note that as free software cares about real freedom, the word "right" here is seen as meaning a [de facto](de_facto.md) right, i.e. NOT just a legal right -- legal rights (a free [license](license.md)) are required but if there appears a non-legal obstacle to those freedoms, free software communities will address them. Again, open source differs here by just focusing on legality.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
The developers of Debian operating system have created their own guidelines (Debian Free Software Guidelines) which respect these points but are worded in more complex terms and further require e.g. non-functional data to be available under free terms as well ([source](https://people.debian.org/~bap/dfsg-faq.html#not_just_code)) which GNU doesn't ([source](https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.en.html#non-functional-data)). The definition of open source is yet more complex even though in practice legally free software is eventually also open source and vice versa.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
# History
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Free software was invented by the great [Richard Stallman](rms.md) in the 1980s. His free software movement inspired later movements such as the [free culture](free_culture.md) movement and the evil [open-source](open_source.md) movement.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
# See Also
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
- [open source](open_source.md)
|
||
|
|
- [free culture](free_culture.md)
|