Yes, of course I agree that search engines aren't SaaS. But that wasn't my
point. What I was trying to say was that when code from some search engine is
released, say for simple indexing of your own hard drive or another purpose,
and this code is proprietary or "open-source" (the bad open-source), your
freedoms are restricted if you use it. If only some of the code is released,
free or proprietary, the code enters into the "gray" area. It's part-free, so
it's not all free. But search engines aren't SaaS, so does it even matter?
Here's how I see it: If you're a developer, and you use code released by a
search engine and it's proprietary, then your program is obviously non-free.
But if you're a user, and you use the output of a proprietary (or
part-proprietary) search engine or program, you may or may not be using
proprietary code. Why? If the link the engine gave you is non-free or sells
non-free programs, then the ''output'' is non-free. Of course, it is not the
engine's job to filter, unless you specifically ask it to do so.
Think of it this way: If you went up to a stranger and asked him directions
to your friend's house, does that make your friend a stranger? No it doesn't,
except if your "friend" really is a stranger or has strangers at his house.
This does not, however, excuse ''developers'' from using non-free code in
search engines. Users aren't guilty however, unless they use this non-free
code locally!
Let me stress though that I believe a free software search engine (as I
believe DDG will become) is an excellent idea, and should be encouraged. I
don't think all people should index the web (as not all users of Trisquel
should make their own OS,) but I do think that this code should be available
for the public to ''use, study, modify, redistribute, and re-release with the
source code available under those same terms''.
BTW, I am in no way against DDG. Great features, community, and privacy make
it a great search engine. (Of course, I'm open to all ideas and
alternatives!) +1 for making it default! :-)
