Your continued donations keep Wikipedia running!    

Free software

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search
This article is about Free Software as defined by the sociopolitical Free Software movement; for information on software distributed without charge, see freeware. For other uses, see free software (disambiguation).

Free software, as defined by the Free Software Foundation, is software which can be used, copied, studied, modified and redistributed without restriction. Freedom from such restrictions is central to the concept of "free software", such that the opposite of free software is proprietary software, and not software which is sold for profit, such as commercial software. Free software may sometimes be known as libre software. The usual way for software to be distributed as free software is for the software to be accompanied by a free software license, and the source code of the software to be made available.

Contents

[edit]

Usage

To help distinguish libre (freedom) software from gratis (zero price) software, Richard Stallman, founder of the Free Software Movement, developed the following explanation: "Free software is a matter of liberty not price. To understand the concept, you should think of 'free' as in 'free speech', not as in 'free beer'". More specifically, free software means that computer users have the freedom to cooperate with whom they choose, and to control the software they use.

Most free software is distributed gratis online, or off-line for the marginal cost of distribution, but this is not required, and people may sell copies for any price. The capitalized term "Open Source" is attached to a definition originally created in 1998 from Debian's rewrite of the GNU definition of "Free Software". As a result, nearly all Open Source programs are Free Software, but there are some exceptions.

Although the open source and free software movements share almost identical license criteria and development practices, according to Stallman the respective philosophical values of the two movements are fundamentally different. Stallman endorses the terms Free/Libre/Open-Source Software ("FLOSS") and Free and Open Source Software ("F/OSS") to refer to "open source" and "free software" respectively, without necessarily choosing between or dividing the two camps, but he asks people to consider supporting the "free software" camp (see Open source vs. free software for more information).

The free BSD-based operating systems, such as FreeBSD, OpenBSD, and NetBSD, use a similar defintion of free software, but they differ in interpretation about copyleft. Users of these systems often see copyleft as being over-restrictive to the point of being an encroachment on their freedom.

"Freeware" is software made available free of charge, but is generally proprietary, as users do not have the freedom to use, copy, study, modify or redistribute. Source code for freeware may or may not be published, and permission to distribute modified versions may or may not be granted, so freeware is gratis, and not libre software.

[edit]

History

A brief history of Free Software:

  • 1960s and 1970s — software was seen as an add-on supplied by mainframe vendors to make computers useful. Thus, programmers and developers frequently shared their software freely. This was especially common in large users groups, such as DECUS, the DEC (Digital Equipment Corporation) Users Group.
  • Late 1970s and early 1980s — companies began routinely imposing restrictions on programmers with end user license agreements. Sometimes this was because companies were now making money from proprietary software or they were trying to keep trade secrets in software or hardware. Bill Gates signalled the change of the times when he wrote a famous open letter where he urged hackers to stop stealing by breaking license agreements.
  • 1983 — Richard Stallman launched the GNU project after becoming frustrated with the effects of the change in culture of the computer industry and users. One incident was when a printer wouldn't work but he couldn't hack the source code to fix the problem because it was withheld. Software development for the GNU operating system began in January 1984, and Free Software Foundation (FSF) was founded in October 1985. He introduced a "free software" definition and "copyleft", designed to ensure software freedom for all. [1] Some reacted strongly against Stallman's position as idealistic nonsense and he was strongly mocked and criticised.
  • Present day — Free Software is a highly successful international effort, producing software used by individuals, large organisations, and even entire countries. Free Software is massive industry. The economic advantages of the Free Software model, and, to a lesser extent, the ethical principles that it was founded upon are beginning to be recognised broadly, even by mainstream media. Also, some other industries — that is, non-software industries — are beginning to recognise the value of Free Software's message too: scientists, for example, are looking towards more open development processes, and hardware such as microchips is beginning to be developed under Copyleft licenses (see the OpenCores project, for instance). The Creative Commons and Open Content movements have also been largely influenced by Free Software.
[edit]

Free software licenses

Main article: free software licenses

According to Stallman and the FSF, "free" software licenses grant:

  • the freedom to run the program for any purpose (called "freedom 0")
  • the freedom to study and modify the program ("freedom 1")
  • the freedom to copy the program so you can help your neighbor ("freedom 2")
  • the freedom to improve the program, and release your improvements to the public, so that the whole community benefits ("freedom 3")

Freedoms 1 and 3 require source code access, because studying and modifying software without source code is extremely difficult and highly inefficient compared to modifying annotated source code.

The FSF web site provides a list of many free software licenses. [2] The list is necessarily incomplete, because a license need not be known to the FSF in order to provide these freedoms.

"Proprietary software" is distributed under more restrictive software licenses. Copyright law and/or contract law restrict modification, duplication and redistribution by users; software released under a free software license rescinds most of these reserved rights.

The FSF free software definition disregards price. CDs containing free software such as GNU/Linux distributions are commonly for sale. However, since the CD buyer still has the free software freedoms, it is free software. Free beer software (freeware) which includes restrictions that confict with the FSF definition are considered proprietary. For example, source code may be unavailable, redistributors may be prohibited charging fees, etc.

Some people use "libre" to avoid the ambiguity of the word "free". However, these terms are mostly used within the free software movement and are slowly spreading.

Variations on free software as defined by the FSF:

  • Copyleft licenses, the GNU General Public License being the most prominent. The author retains copyright and permits redistribution and modification under terms to ensure that all modified versions remain free.
  • Public domain software - the author has abandoned the copyright. Since public-domain software lacks copyright protection, it may be freely incorporated into any work, whether proprietary or free.
  • BSD-style licenses, so called because they are applied to much of the software distributed with the BSD operating systems. The author retains copyright protection solely to disclaim warranty and require proper attribution of modified works, but permits redistribution and modification in any work, even proprietary ones.

A copyright owner of copyleft-licensed software can produce and sell a version under any license, in addition to distributing the original version as free software. Many free software companies do this; this does not restrict any rights granted to the users of the copyleft version.

All free software licenses must grant people all the freedoms discussed above. However, unless the applications' licenses are compatible, combining programs by mixing source code or directly linking binaries is problematic, because of license technicalities. Programs indirectly connected together may avoid this problem.

[edit]

Examples of free software

Notable free software:

The Free Software Directory is a free software project that maintains a large database of free software packages.

The most accessible and comprehensive collections of free software are currently distributed as LiveDistros, entire operating systems stored and made ready to boot on CDs, USB sticks, DVDs, and other bootable media. By inserting a LiveDistro into your CD drive and booting the computer you arrive to a desktop with hundreds of free software packages ready to run and use.

Some free software packages work on the non-free Microsoft Windows and non-free Unix platforms. Non-free software can work on free platforms, although purists prefer using platforms composed entirely of free software such as GNU/Linux.

Free software packages constitute a software ecosystem where software provides services, resulting in mutual benefit: for instance, the Apache web server handling the HTTP protocol, using mod_python to provide dynamic content.

[edit]

Social significance

[edit]

Positive Social Outcomes

  • Free software is generally available at little to no cost (it is gratis). When free software spreads, its utility is constant, or even increases due to network effects. Thus, free software is a pure public good rather than a private good.
  • Its freedoms result in a permanently lower cost compared to proprietary software increasing access to software and to its ecomonic and social benefits. Due to this fact free software is becoming popular in third world countries.
  • Furthermore, the openness of free software eases internationalization creating economic and social benefits for users in more countries.
  • The freedom to modify free software prevents media tie-ins e.g. between web browsers, and web search engines (or between computer manufacturers and same), because such tie-ins can always be broken by the owners of a system.
  • The ability to view and modify the software provides a practical defence against Spyware.
[edit]

Negative Social Outcomes

Possible loss of the economic incentives to produce software that were protected by copyright law or patents. Copies of free software can be sold, although there is often less incentive to buy free software when it can usually be obtained for free.

[edit]

Political Characterisation

Computer software is inanimate and therefore not political. However, its effects on society, like speech, are political.

[edit]

Free software as a communist movement

SCO CEO Darl McBride and others have tended to characterise Free Software as communist.[3] The accusation leverages the influential legacy of anti-communism in United States to generate an effect in the market or in legal matters.[4] Communism opposes the free market and rejects private property. Free software gives users the same freedoms the copyright holder has, while the owners of proprietary software restrict freedoms to make profit. The free software community is also critical of software patents, and other protections in technology that restrict freedoms. Models for collective ownership in free software is at odds with capitalistic ownership and production. However, free software licenses give the freedom to charge a price for distributing the software. Further, one or more copyright holders have copyright law to enforce the license of their free software package if the need arises.

[edit]

Free software as a libertarian movement

The libertarian ideal can be characterised as being in favour of social liberty (including free speech, a free press and privacy) as well as economic liberty (including property rights and individual control over property) and in favour of a capitalist free market. There is some evidence that free software is congruent with libertarian ideals of economic liberty, intellectual property [5] and freedom from invasions of privacy.

Free software license terms guarantee that anybody coming into possession of the software has the source code and the right to modify, reproduce and distribute it. Consequently anybody with the required knowledge is able to perform modifications and provide support for the product. Modifications are enabled directly by access to the source code and other services can be provided by those who have examined and learned about the product as users and maintainers. The result is a marketplace open to competition from a wide range of participants. There is little or no barrier to entry to the market since all the necessary permissions are granted by the license. The creation of this competition for services is appealing to the libertarian ideal of the free market and facilitates the creation of businesses.

The right to modify their software also enables users to exercise complete control over the computing devices that they own. Though users are generally free to choose which software products they run, the ability to modify the software products themselves means that assets can be exploited more efficiently. This reinforces the benefits of existing property and creating a situation of complete control. This control precipitates many of the positive social outcomes described above, including enhanced computer security, electronic privacy and consumer choice.

[edit]

Individual motivations

Often coming into question is the reasons and motivations individuals would make the effort to participate and contribute to free software. Individuals within a team typically have a wide variety of motivations. Often, there are stances on the relationship between free software and the existing capitalist economic system. Some contributors dislike the capitalist economic system, and perceive that free software and capitalism are incompatible, so more free software results in less capitalism. They may also believe in inter-market competition, and that free software is a form of competition within capitalism. They may also perceive that copyright is governmental market restrictions. Other motivations implement gift economics, where status depends effectively on "gifts" from the contributor.

[edit]

Relative security

A fellow editor requested that someone provide references or sources for the information in this section.

There is controversy over the security of free software versus proprietary software, with a a major issue being security through obscurity. A popular relative security measurement is counting known unpatched security flaws. Generally, users of this method advise avoiding products which lack fixes for known security flaws, at least until a fix is available.

[edit]

Free software controversies

The BitKeeper controversy in the free software movement illustrates the movement's major issues and points of view.

Larry McVoy invited high-profile free software projects to use BitKeeper to attract paying users. In 2002 a controversial decision was made to use BitKeeper, a proprietary software product, to develop the Linux kernel, a free software project. The following excerpt from a Newsforge article illustrates why this proved to be a major source of controversy.

"McVoy made the program available gratis to free software developers. This did not mean it was free software for them: they were privileged not to part with their money, but they still had to part with their freedom. They gave up the fundamental freedoms that define free software: freedom to run the program as you wish for any purpose, freedom to study and change the source code as you wish, freedom to make and redistribute copies, and freedom to publish modified versions.
The Free Software Movement has said "Think of free speech, not free beer" for 15 years. McVoy said the opposite; he invited developers to focus on the lack of monetary price, instead of on freedom. A free software activist would dismiss this suggestion, but those in our community who value technical advantage above freedom and community were susceptible to it. ...
A free kernel, even a whole free operating system, is not sufficient to use your computer in freedom; we need free software for everything else, too. Free applications, free drivers, free BIOS: some of those projects face large obstacles -- the need to reverse engineer formats or protocols or pressure companies to document them, or to work around or face down patent threats, or to compete with a network effect. Success will require firmness and determination. A better kernel is desirable, to be sure, but not at the expense of weakening the impetus to liberate the rest of the software world." [6]

McVoy withdrew permission for gratis use by free software projects. Many in the free software movement see the whole affair as a vindication of Richard Stallman's principled position over the more utilitarian approach of Linus Torvalds.

[edit]

See also

[edit]

External links


This article is part of the series: forms of software distribution

Abandonware | Adware | Baitware | Beerware | Careware | Crippleware | Demoware | Donateware | Free software | Freeware | Greenware | Guiltware | Hostageware | Loyaltyware | Malware | Nagware | Open source | Postcardware | Ransomware | Shareware | Shovelware | Spyware | Vaporware
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software"
Personal tools