"Free software" is still a bad term - it's completely misunderstood by the public [LWN.net]

"Free software" is still a bad term - it's completely misunderstood by the public

Posted Nov 30, 2006 17:20 UTC (Thu) by dwheeler (guest, #1216)
In reply to: Richard Stallman was right by njs
Parent article: What is open source?

The term "Free software" is well-understood by the general public. It means "I don't have to pay to get a copy".

That is NOT what the Free Software Foundation means, and I know it well. But this continued use of a term that has a pre-existing, unrelated meaning is NOT helpful. The explanation that "it's about freedom" doesn't help, because people already think they know what it means.... they don't even ask the question. Any conversion that has to start by UNDEFINING a well-understood phrase is unlikely to go well.

I wish that they'd use the term "Libre software", or at least "Freed software". Many people use the term "Open source software" even if they agree with Stallman's position, simply because "Free software" is comfusing.

Companies pay millions for creating a clear brand. The FSF has failed to create a clear, unambiguous brand name for the idea that it is selling, and continues to pay a price for it. All would be better if they'd finally agree on, and start using, a term that is actually clear and unambiguous.

(Log in to post comments)

"Free software" is still a bad term - it's completely misunderstood by the public

Posted Dec 1, 2006 5:35 UTC (Fri) by jstAusr (guest, #27224) [Link]

I don't think the FSF would have any problem if everyone used the term "Libre software" the problem is you can't force people to use the term they need to do it on their own. It's just like you can't force people to think 'open source" means what OSI wants it to mean. RMS had stated that he understands the problem, but the implications of people thinking that open source is any software that in some way has viewable source, is far worse than people thinking that Free Software means no cost.

freedom software

Posted Dec 2, 2006 1:49 UTC (Sat) by grouch (guest, #27289) [Link]

How about freedom software? It's just different enough from "free software" to either avoid the emphasis on zero cost or to spark a question about the term itself. In the U.S., at least, the term calls up images that match several aspects of free software -- personal freedom, individual efforts combined into a community working toward common goals, and licensing that restricts only that which is necessary for maintaining equal freedom for users of the software.

freedom software

Posted Dec 7, 2006 10:11 UTC (Thu) by Duncan (guest, #6647) [Link]

Exactly. I've been using the term "freedomware", an obvious and equally
unambiguous shorter form of "freedom software" in my own writing for some
time -- since "libre software" aka "libreware" first hit the spotlight.
It's especially effective (and controversial, but it does get the point
across) when used in combination with "slaveryware".

My newsgroup and mailinglist signature is an RMS quote that reinforces and
clarifies the meaning as well.

--
Duncan
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman

freedom software

Posted Dec 7, 2006 10:43 UTC (Thu) by arcticwolf (guest, #8341) [Link]

I don't know, but that's far too reminiscent of "freedom fries" for me.

"Free software" is still a bad term - it's completely misunderstood by the public

Posted Dec 3, 2006 20:34 UTC (Sun) by dirtyepic (subscriber, #30178) [Link]

Because "libre" doesn't mean anything to anyone who speaks English, and I actually misread Freed Software as Fried Software at first glance. It's difficult to tell the difference between "free" and "freed" when spoken anyways. What we need to do is start referring to Non-Free software as software In Captivity. ;)

"Free software" is still a bad term - it's completely misunderstood by the public

Posted Dec 3, 2006 20:37 UTC (Sun) by cantsin (subscriber, #4420) [Link]

In my experience, the term "non-proprietary software" is best understood by lay people, although it would be nicer to define it in other than negative terms.

"Free software" is still a bad term - it's completely misunderstood by the public

Posted Dec 4, 2006 6:39 UTC (Mon) by bronson (subscriber, #4806) [Link]

I don't think "captive software" will ever take off. Just look at the uptake of crackers vs. hackers... nobody uses "cracker."

I like "freedom software" suggested earlier. It's got that Patriot Act you'd-be-an-idiot-to-disagree-with-it ring to it. :)