Hello. I read the thread, and I disagree with all opinions expressed.
Software is information, and has zero marginal cost in replication and spreading. Any "metaphor" with physical goods is weak; people will soon find the weak points of the metaphor, and disregard free software. I quote the last posts here, to show a different point of view, not because I've anything against people I quote. Erik Albers: > I also like an analogy between Open Standards and screws/screwdrivers: This is good about file formats. We need to be interoperable, and we need to reject technical choices designed to lock-in people. It is unrelated with free software, although I'm now convinced we need to win the file-format battle before we even fight the FS one with any chance of success. (FWIW I changed my mind over the years, I argued vehemently against this point of view when I was younger). Nicolas Jean adds to the "specific screws" idea: > A tool that's preferably very, very expensive. And that you can only > buy from said hardware manufacturer. Because other companies aren't > allowed to build it let alone sell it to you, thanks to patents. Now, I wouldn't ever bring patents in a discussion about freedom, especially patents about mechanical stuff. I'm personally convinced that patents are nowadays detrimental to society in every field. but most people think patents are the holy solution to save the poor and smart inventor against big companies. Besides, people is happy nowadays to have a very good tool even if it is unfixable because of special screws. Who tried to fix stuff nowadays? Me and you: statistically nobody. Let's talk about freedom and rights. Whether patents are good or bad is another topic that can only be introduced later. And people will *not* agree about patents even after they agreed on user's protection. I mean, if we look at ways to explain free software to the unaware, we should avoid talking about patents. Patents are a good and hot topic to discuss with informed people, not the ones that need "metaphors" to get the basic concepts. Paul van der Vlis: > But I like: "Proprietary software is like patented seed". This works for you, because both ideas sound very bad to you. For too many people, patents on seeds are the proper compensation for the ones who make research for the benefit of mankind. I see no similarity between seeds and software, I'm sorry. If we need a metaphor to explain free software to people, we need to remain in the field of information, of knowledge that can be spread at no cost. I usually refer to the market of lawyers and physicians, teaching in general, fiscal consulting and architectural work. Each with its own differences and limitations, they are information-based markets. Information is available to everyone, but still I go to lawyers and physicians rather than studying a completely new subject matter for months/years. And the result I get back can be reused. Just like our clients come to us instead of coding by themselves, and we don't put any restrictions on what we deliver. And they even *pay* us for free information, like we pay teachers and lawyers. That said, software is so "technological", so "black box", so "illegal to copy", so "intellectual property" and so "magic" in the end, that most of my audience refuses to see that it is the *only* information that is so constrained by a perverse market tradition -- a tradition that was born especially because software was for an elite, not for everybody. With this social environment, I wouldn't make comparisons with any physical good, because such similarities just don't apply. Calling information "products" helps spreading false views, and comparing with real products brings to ideas like "the software industry" and "intellectual property". That said, I'm happy we have different views, and I'm ok with any disagreement I might get back, whatever strong. Being different is our biggest strength, not only our biggest weakness. thanks for this discussion, and for reading so far /alessandro _______________________________________________ Discussion mailing list [email protected] https://mail.fsfeurope.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
