Re: [Fsfe-uk] Liberated software

[Chris Croughton]

On Sat, Oct 09, 2004 at 09:40:01AM +0100, Simon Waters wrote:

> I think the mistake is to worry too much about the misunderstanding
> of the term "free", and concentrate on sending a clear message that
> software that doesn't cost anything, but to which you have no right
> to inspect, modify, or redistribute, isn't free software.

But it is, that's the problem.  As someone else pointed out, the word
'free' is almost as overloaded as the word 'love', and any and all of
the meanings are as accurate as the others.

> As such I propose using the term "gratis software" for non-free
> software with a zero price tag.

Very good.  Now go back in time 30 or so years and persuade all of those
producing 'freeware' and the like to use it, and you might have a
chance.  The fact is that now (2004-09-09) probably 99% of the
population default to the meaning 'costless' when they hear the word
'free' relating to an object (and software is an object in this sense,
it isn't a person).

> "Gratis" whilst an unusual word, is fairly widely understood as
> meaning "free as in beer" (a phrase I hate as I will happily share
> any beer recipes I have, and you are welcome to modify them. Should
> we call that "open beer"?).

If you give me a recipe for beer, I'm still thirsty, and it takes a lot
longer to brew a pint of beer (can you brew just one pint?) than it does
to recompile GCC.  And costs more as well (giving me the source to GCC
costs a quid at most, including CD and postage).

How about "free as in parking"?  Again, almost everyone will concentrate
on the "no money" aspect, because there are lots of other places where
you have the freedom to park if you pay for it.  And for that matter,
you do pay for the "free parking" in most cases as well, through taxes
for council-run car parks and through extra on the cost of goods and
services for private ones (e.g. for shops).  TANSTAAFL -- There Ain't No
Such Thing As A Free Lunch.

> Whilst gratis is a tad old fashioned, I see this as an advantage,
> who wants to be running Elizabethan software? Whilst we are having a
> language fest why does "Elizabethan" always mean Elizabeth the First?

(a) It doesn't, only most of the time.
(b) Because she was the last Queen Elizabeth of England and Wales alone,
the modern one is also queen of Scotland.

> Gratis also, for me anyway, conjures up images of money lenders, but
> I blaim English teachers obsession with Shakespeare for that.

And of foreigners, probably the same source (Shylock was a Jew, and
those of whom he complained were Venetians (although not blind).

> Anyway if enough people start using "gratis" to mean "without
> charge", people will eventually use "free" only as in "freedom", and
> English will be able to more easily make one more distinction, and
> the English language (as it is spoken) slightly richer.

The key word there is 'if'.  There are probably over 300 million people
using the word 'free' to mean "no money" for objects (including software
and music), good luck persuading them to change.  The tendency in the
English language is for words to become less distinct, and for
differences to be glossed over and combined, this is reinforced not only
by the media, and by the mixing of English and American meanings, but
even by the education system (30 or more years ago I was complaining
that tests used questions like "Which of these 4 words doesn't mean the
same as the others?" -- to me all of them meant something different,
they were different words).

> For me the terms "gratis", "free", and specifically "copyleft" as a
> type of free software, allow me to express myself effectively. We
> just need to use terms consistently, and people will come to
> understand us. Education takes time.

Indeed, but in the interim almost everyone will misunderstand what you
say, and will get bored that you are using a private meaning for a word
and insisting that listeners remember what your meaning is when they
need a different meaning for 99% of the other people who use the word.
Ever tried to persuade Americans that when you say "I feel like a fag"
you are referring to a cigarette?  They'll still snigger when you say it
even 20 years after they've learnt your usage.

Redefining words, as opposed to inventing new ones (and "gratis
software" is effectively a new term in this context), takes not only
timr but there has to be a percievable benefit to the majority of the
speakers and listeners, and even then it may take generations (my
grandmother always thought 'happy' when she heard the word 'gay' until
she died; she knew the other meaning but it never became her default
interpretation).  In the case of 'free' you would effectively have to
ban its use in all other areas where it meens "no money" -- concerts,
parking, samples, estimates, etc. -- or to so saturate the media with
your preferred meaning that the other usage died out.

Or you could use another word.  I think that "software libre" (which the
Americans would probably spell "liber", thus confusing freedom with
books, but how many people know Latin these days or care?) has more
chance of being adopted.  I would happily use that term, but getting the
FSF to change name...

Chris C