copyleft software, not "free" software [LWN.net]

copyleft software, not "free" software

Posted Sep 29, 2020 10:19 UTC (Tue) by smcv (subscriber, #53363)
In reply to: copyleft software, not "free" software by rsidd
Parent article: Toward a "modern" Emacs

With hindsight, it's unfortunate that the originators of the free software term didn't talk about "software freedom" rather than "free software", which would have meant the same thing while avoiding the whole free beer/free speech ambiguity.

Regarding the difference between free software and copyleft: free software (or software freedom if you prefer) is a goal, but copyleft is one of several possible strategies for achieving that goal (permissive licensing is another). Copyleft is closely associated with the term "free software" because the FSF has chosen to use copyleft as their main strategy, but it isn't actually their objective.

to post comments

copyleft software, not "free" software

Posted Oct 5, 2020 21:05 UTC (Mon) by marcH (subscriber, #57642) [Link]

> With hindsight, it's unfortunate that the originators of the free software term didn't talk about "software freedom" rather than "free software", which would have meant the same thing while avoiding the whole free beer/free speech ambiguity.

... and also avoided any copyleft/permissive ambiguity - thanks!

BTW "Software Freedom Conservancy" is an exceptionally clear name.

While their top goal seems to be copyleft enforcement, funny enough they don't seem to request copyright assignment before sending a patch. Their website also seems less focused on philosophy and more on getting copyleft things done but maybe that's just my impression.