Re: [Fsuk-manchester] Free Software as a brand

[Lucy]

2009/6/14 Michael Dorrington <address@hidden>:
> This is an interesting discussion about Open Source but you have to
> understand two things:
>
> 1) Open Source is not a synonym for Free Software, see
> <http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html>.
>
> 2) This is Manchester Free Software not Manchester Open Source, its not
> even Manchester FOSS.

I suggest you read the article!

Due to its popularity 'open source' is now coming up against the
problem that free software advocates said it would - a dilution of
meaning and an ignorance of freedom. This infighting of free software
verses open source is more damaging than productive. Personally, I
think that standing up for open source where the term is being used
incorrectly, is better than bitching about it being used at all.

[snip]
Matthew Larsen wrote:
>> 2) The idea of having some sort of FOSS badge or 'This product is
>> open-source' sort of certification could be a good forward driver. There
>> allready exists these systems (for example we could just say its open
>> source, whack on the GNU symbol etc) but it doesn't really have the same
>> appeal as say a Freeview sticker does. Some sort of badge and associated
>> website / branding effort on this front could be quite instrumental in
>> educating Joe Public and could provide another layer of viability to the
>> movement. Speculativly it could also help with validating the movement and
>> ideas in law and politics.
>
> I think FSF would get a bit upset if you whacked on a GNU symbol to a
> system and called it open source!

I think the FSF would get upset if you put the GNU symbol on anything
that wasn't a part of the GNU project!

There is a problem with license proliferation. I think the OSI and the
FSF help developers by providing definitive lists but I don't think
it's something that the end user should have to be aware of. A FOSS
badge would certainly help this problem, it would mean that an end
user could chose a piece of software without having to understand the
different licenses or even the differences between free software and
open source.

[snip]
>>..In personal experience it seems at the
>> moment we turn up with a bunch of GNU stickers, Ubuntu banners and a big
>> penguin - none of these to Joe Public really have any connection and looks a
>> bit random. It doesn't really have the same impact as Microsoft setting up a
>> stall and having their name and the windows logo slapped on everything.

I agree, in my experience it is really confusing for people and I feel
that it's one of the strengths of Ubuntu, that they have created a
really strong, positive brand that people can easily understand.
Something like that for FOSS would be of real benefit (maybe like a
kite mark but more eye-catching).

> Microsoft don't turn up with a big banner saying "Proprietary Software".
> They are a company and promote their products. We are trying to promote
> a philosophical idea and not a company's products. We want people to
> understand (and agree with!:) the idea not a particular product. We need
> to explain how all these, perhaps seemingly random, bits come from that
> philosophical idea. I want us to get a big poster explaining Free
> Software and the 4 freedoms which should help make things more clear to
> people.

Why can an idea not have a brand or logo?! A brand can be a way of
linking the four freedoms in a recognisable way. FWIW, I've already
created that poster and shown it off at both Arcspace events.

> The closest we have to an overarching organistion is the Free Software
> Foundation but we are not a branch of them so we shouldn't promote under
> that umbrella.

The FOSS movement has too many disparate organisations, it's confusing
for us never mind someone who's still trying to grasp what a web
browser is. A unified brand would enable us to keep these different
groups but provide a way of linking them together.