Free Software - A political project
Definition
Political Project
A political project is a collective action with well defined revendications brought forward by civil
society and the state aimed at fighting injustices and oppression, rectifying power imbalances or
maintaining previously acquired freedoms.
Free Software
Before defining what Free Software is, let's clear some misconceptions and see what it is not. The
qualifier free is a misnomer with multiple meanings in English. In this context it can be understood
has referring to a lack of monetary value (i.e free as in beer) or to freedom (i.e free as in
speech). The latter being the correct interpretation.
Simplest definition
In its most simplified form Free Software is defined as any program with a license allowing it to be
freely used, copied, shared and modified; source code included. At its antipode exist non-free
software among them proprietary software, freeware and shareware.
This definition is quite flawed; only mentioning licensing. Framing it as a legal requirement
for programs instead of treating the software as incidental, only the medium through which freedoms
are to be considered.
Free Software Foundation definition
- The freedom to run the program as you wish, for any purpose (freedom 0).
- The freedom to study how the program works, and change it so it does your computing as you wish
(freedom 1). Access to the source code is a precondition for this.- The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help others (freedom 2).
- The freedom to distribute copies of your modified versions to others (freedom 3). By doing this
you can give the whole community a chance to benefit from your changes. Access to the source code
is a precondition for this.
The Free Software Foundation (FSF) as the initial structure supporting theses ideas put forward the
four freedoms as the core principles necessary to protects users' rights and by extension
developers' duties.
The Debian Free Software Guidelines (DFSG)
The Debian social contract establish an agreement as a set of commitments between them and the
community. Their software guidelines extend the ones from the FSF and are the basis for the Open
Source definition.
Open Source Definition
The terms free and open source software are often used interchangeably, most programs belonging to
one category belongs de facto to the other. The difference lies in their vision; contrary to the Free
Software movement and its commitment to freedom; Open Source movement guided by the Open Source
Initiative (OSI) mainly emphasize the practical benefits (i.e "higher quality, better reliability,
greater flexibility, lower cost, and an end to predatory vendor lock-in.".)
Contrast between the Free Software and Open Source movement
The schism between the Free Software and Open Source movement is one of idealism versus pragmatism.
One values freedom while the other is interested in the by-products afforded by the first one.
When freedom is at stake prioritizing the practical benefits in order to "provide economic and
strategic advantages" completely misses the mark.
Focusing on the utilitarian value at the expense of freedom doesn't address the core issue and incur
the risk of finding a sub-optimal solution or worse, solving the wrong problem.
In practice there is enough overlap between the two movements, people and projects to enable
fruitful collaborations. Let's just remember that the moral imperative should take precedence.
An abridged history of Free Software
In the early days, software was freely available; modification and distribution was the norm. The
problem arose from the commercialization of software by corporations.
GNU Project
In 1983 the GNU was born to create a free operating system. This project and its ideals resonated
with others who joined to bring it to reality.
Free Software Foundation
To support GNU and advocate for its principle the Free Software Foundation was created in 1985.
Copyleft license
To formalize these freedoms the GNU Public License was created in 1989 (GPLv1), modified in 1991
(GPLv2) and 2007 (GPLv3). As the first copyleft license its importance cannot not be overstated, not
only does it grant users' rights but preserve it in derivative works. Derivative works must then use
the same or compatible license, preventing bad actors from restricting users freedom.
The missing piece
In 1992 Linux created the year prior switched to the GPL, becoming the missing piece of what is now
known as GNU/Linux.
Current state
Since then many people and organizations around the world have taken ownership of the issue stirring
the movement forward; resulting in a decentralized yet very intertwine ecosystem.
Road map for the future
Despite its success, one can not ignore the discrepancy between the omnipresence of free software in
the digital infrastructure and the realization of those freedoms.
Corporations have co-opted it to build their empire, with most users interacting with technology
through their products. Only those who have deliberately chosen the alternative have their freedoms
respected.
Much work remains to be done to bridge this gap, through advocacy and policy changes.
Free Software politics
Self governance
Any project needs to be managed. Small projects with few organizational moving parts tend to have a
trivial governance model. Bigger projects especially those with a community need to ensure technical
vision and group cohesion within or between contributors and users. Theses mechanisms can be informal
related to the project culture or formal with some legal structure.
The fight for freedom cannot be isolated from other current societal issues, hence care is taken to
include underrepresented people who face any form of systemic discrimination, establish a democratic
process to ensure their voice are heard. The environmental impact, unintended consequences or
potential misuses of technology are also considered.
Push for legislation
Campaigning for free software legislation and related issues is indispensable for democracy to prevail.
Being an active participant
One might ask who can be a participant, the answer is quite simple: everybody. The digital world is
not isolated from our society, but a mere extension. Its profound effect on our daily life and
society necessitate to closely follow its development.
Contributions can be technical in nature, creating or maintaining software. But doesn't need to be;
testing software, improving its design, writing documentation, adding translation, managing
community are also necessary. Financial contribution is of vital importance to ensure its
sustainability.
One can also be vocal about their use of free software, help people engage with it, put this issue
at the center of traditional political spaces and push for policy changes.
Leveraging Free software in other political projects
Other political projects can leverage free software, since building digital spaces for the public
interest unencumbered by private interest is a prerequisite for true freedom of speech, freedom of
press, and privacy.
Conclusion
The broader Free software movement and individual projects are no strangers to internal struggles
leading to schisms; the formation of subgroups on the basis of philosophical or cultural
differences, internal politics and technical disagreements. What to the outside may look like
turmoil is actually the mark of a healthy and resilient movement, a thriving ecosystem fighting for
freedom and driving innovation.
Despite all challenges faced, the current state is quite a prowess. Let's build on it to ensure
freedom for everybody within our communities and in society.
Post scriptum
Free software has been showed to fundamentally be political. One could certainly disagree and debate
theses points. What is not tolerable is the use of the non political viewpoint by some very
dishonest individuals with despicable views as a way to exclude others; who when not tolerated in
our communities present themselves as victims. We should see their voluntary departure or expedited
expulsion as good riddance of bad rubbish.