[GNU-linux-libre] Proposal to revise FSDG to exclude SaaSS-only software clients

[Jean Louis]

On many of our computers in office and home, we run Hyperbola
GNU/Linux-libre, and I was very satisfied with the decisions of
managers who take care of users' freedom.

One reference for readers is here:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html

While we all know what is free software, the reference is to
philosophical parts and methods of verification of freedom for users:

Quote:

,----
| The freedom to run the program as you wish
| 
| The freedom to run the program means the freedom for any kind of
| person or organization to use it on any kind of computer system, for
| any kind of overall job and purpose, without being required to
| communicate about it with the developer or any other specific
| entity. In this freedom, it is the user's purpose that matters, not
| the developer's purpose; you as a user are free to run the program for
| your purposes, and if you distribute it to someone else, she is then
| free to run it for her purposes, but you are not entitled to impose
| your purposes on her.
`----

When software package such as Telegram Desktop is included in the FSF
free software distribution, there are factors to observe:

- Telegram Desktop communicates exclusively with SaaSS Telegram
  servers, there is vendor's lock in, and there exist no free server
  software that users can host it themselves and thus operated client
  software such as Telegram Desktop with their own self-hosted
  servers.

- Telegram network is centralized, server software is proprietary, API
  terms are proprietary and represent "further restrictions" on the
  GPL3, which are we free to ignore; we may build "Telegram-like
  server", but nobody did that; however, by ignoring it legal threats
  or issues do not end by ignorance, and issue for FSF endorsed
  distribution is not ended there. Reference:
  https://core.telegram.org/api/terms where that API terms dictate
  limits on how client software cannot be changed; this impairs users'
  freedom, but we are are, due to GPL3, free to ignore such further
  restrictions.

  In addition to that, Telegram Desktop DOES NOT clearly indicate in
  sources that there are further restrictions that relate to some
  specific part of program. There is something about "API acceptance"
  in the software, but no reference to further restrictions.

- FSF promotes decentralization, references:

  https://www.fsf.org/campaigns/campaigns-summaries#surveillance
  https://www.fsf.org/campaigns/surveillance
  
https://www.fsf.org/news/free-software-foundation-statement-on-prism-revelations

  Quotes like:

  "To protect their freedom and privacy, the FSF urges everyone to
  contact their representatives, avoid Software as a Service, and
  donate to support projects working for a better, safer world."

  Now does that everyone includes also decision makers within the FSF
  endorsed free system distributions? I think so.

- There are huge privacy issues, for example there is no encryption
  for GNU/Linux users, read:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telegram_(software)#Secret_chats
  and security breaches:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telegram_(software)#Security_breaches

Now, FSF promotes decentralization, is putting money and efforts to
decentralize Internet, but on the other hand endorses system
distributions which ship centralized software which only purpose is to
serve developers', to serve the network and vendor's purpose, and not
users' purpose, where users are unable to install proprietary server
themselves and build their own networks.

Some free OS distributions do not share this opinion and include such
software such as Telegram Desktop and other similar software clients
that interact with proprietary SaaSS. They look into software package
itself only, not looking at a broader picture, and if software is
GPL licensed, then it seem to be enough to be included in the FSF
endorsed system distribution.

But I don't think so.

As such (Telegram Desktop and akin clients interacting solely with
proprietary SaasS) software's purpose is sole purpose to serve
developers' purpose, that is to widen their network and earn more
money, but do not help user to build users' own network.

Luckily, Hyperbola GNU/Linux-libre excludes software that is meant to
exclusively serve developers' purposes, not users' purposes. Example
grep result:

grep -i telegram blacklist.txt 
cutegram::hyperbola:1005:[nonprivacy] only useful with Telegram service
libqtelegram-ae::hyperbola:1006:[nonprivacy] only useful with Telegram service
telegram-qt::hyperbola:1007:[nonprivacy] only useful with Telegram service
telegramqml::hyperbola:1008:[nonprivacy] only useful with Telegram service
telepathy-morse::hyperbola:1009:[nonprivacy] only useful with Telegram service

Other examples:

skype-call-recorder::::[uses-nonfree] only useful with Skype installed

Slight comment: Skype runs as proprietary software on computer, but it
also serves as good example that GPL3 license for software will not be
the only decision factor if some package will be included in the FSF
endorsed distribution or not. We have to implement what we teach and
preach.

s3cmd::::[nonprivacy] only useful with Amazon S3

Slight comment here, I am not sure if s3cmd decision is right or
wrong, maybe s3cmd may be used with other servers, I am pointing
rather to the fact that Hyperbola does make good decisions to exclude
software which sole purpose is to serve the proprietary SaaSS.

Thus my proposal is that FSF reviews these matters, and that free
system distributions adopt the principles of Hyperbola GNU/Linux-libre
developers, to look at the broader picture when deciding if software
should be included or not -- not only into the fact that it is
GPL/otherwise-freely licensed.

Few questions shall be raised when there are conflicting issues raised
in relation to GPL/otherwise-freely licensed client software:

Purpose of software
====================

https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html

When including package, client software into free system distribution
endorsed by FSF, developers shall ask themselves: is the sole purpose
of this package to interact with proprietary SaaSS and thus promote
relationship to vendor and vendor's purposes? If YES, such package
should not be included.

Or does that software helps users to be free to build their own
network with free server side software that interacts with client
software?  Do we have a free server software that may be used with
this software? If YES, then package should be included.

Answer to these questions also solves the promotion of decentralized
networks and is aligned to FSF public statements.

Inclusion of client software into FSF endorsed free system
distributions that promote centralized vendor' politics, does not
conform to FSF public statements and campaigns on surveillance and
decentralizations.

Quote:

,----
| The freedom to run the program as you wish
| 
| The freedom to run the program means the freedom for any kind of
| person or organization to use it on any kind of computer system, for
| any kind of overall job and purpose, without being required to
| communicate about it with the developer or any other specific
| entity. In this freedom, it is the user's purpose that matters, not
| the developer's purpose; you as a user are free to run the program for
| your purposes, and if you distribute it to someone else, she is then
| free to run it for her purposes, but you are not entitled to impose
| your purposes on her.
`----

Thus I am asking FSF and developers of free system distributions to
consider these issues, and EXCLUDE software clients that have the sole
purpose to serve proprietary SaaSS -- where there is no server
software that users may install themselves.


Jean

Take action in Free Software Foundation campaigns:
https://www.fsf.org/campaigns

Sign an open letter in support of Richard M. Stallman
https://rms-support-letter.github.io/

Discussion on Parabola:
https://labs.parabola.nu/issues/3010