Sun 05 Jun 2011 11:24:51 AM UTC, comment #2:
Hello
Thank you for the reply.
I wrote before that something in INSTALL file doesn't conform to FSF's policy. Now I know this was an unhappy saying.
I think that people could interpret it as: Since GNU FreeFont is a GNU Project, it must comply to FSF's policy.
Perhaps this is true, but I do not know FSF's policy or the GNU Project's organisation well enough as to make such a statement.
Anyhow, I think that this interpretation could lead the parties involved to think that this issue should be solved administratively.
That was the last of my intentions.
A better saying is:
There's something in INSTALL file that doesn't comply with the general guidelines of free software advocacy.
And that is what I wish to convince the GNU FreeFont developers of.
Before continuing with the discussion itself, I'll put things unambiguously.
STATE OF THINGS
I downloaded the files:
http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/freefont/freefont-otf-20100919.tar.gz
http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/freefont/freefont-ttf-20100919.tar.gz
After decompressing and dearchiving both files I found a plain text file named README and a plain text file named INSTALL.
I have nothing to say on the contents of README.
I will now quote a piece of text from INSTALL.
"
Windows 95/98/NT/2000/XP; Vista
-------------------------------
Note that in at least Vista, XP and 2000, the OpenType versions perform much
better than, and are recommended over, the TrueType ones.
1) From the Start menu, open Control Panels
2) Drag-n-drop font files onto Fonts control panel
You may get a dialog saying
"Windows needs your permission to continue"
a) Click Continue
The font installation is similar to Vista.
In order to use OpenType, users of Windows 95, 98 and NT 4.0 can
install Adobe's 'Type Manager Light'. It is available for download
without cost from Adobe's web site.
Otherwise, use the TrueType versions.
"
This piece of text will serve in the following discussion, so I'll name it "Extract".
I will now quote a piece of text from Extract:
"
In order to use OpenType, users of Windows 95, 98 and NT 4.0 can
install Adobe's 'Type Manager Light'. It is available for download
without cost from Adobe's web site.
"
This is where I see an issue. I will name this piece of text "Issue".
WHY THE DISCUSSION?
The raw interpretation of Issue is:
Information 1: In order to use OpenType versions in Windows 95/98/NT it is necessary to have installed Adobe's Type Manager Light.
Information 2: Adobe's Type Manager light is available for download from Adobe's web site.
Information 3: One can download Adobe's Type Manager light from Adobe's web site without having to pay money to Adobe.
These informations may be true, but for a free software advocate one of them is misleading (Information 3) and the whole of them is too raw. There is a lot of other information that is missing. Not every person that happens to meet GNU FreeFont and who may be considering using it is full conscious of the philosophy of free software and of the risks it poses to him/her the use of proprietary software.
The issue I raise is that in Issue the developer may potentially and unwilling lead a blindfolded user to use proprietary software.
The fact that in Extract are instructions on how MS Windows users can install GNU FreeFont is by no means an encouragement for the reader to use MS Windows. It's even a good incentive to MS Windows users to stop using proprietary fonts. But informing the reader of the possible need of installing an additonal piece of proprietary software that he may not already have, without warning the reader about the dangers it implies, that could felt as an encouragement by the reader.
PARTICULAR DISCUSSION
According to Extract:
- users of Windows 95/98/NT/2000/XP/Vista can install and use TrueType versions.
- users of Windows 95/98/NT/2000/XP/Vista can install OpenType versions.
- users of Windows 2000/XP/Vista can use OpenType versions, achieving by that way better results than using TrueType versions.
- users of Windows 95/98/NT, in order to be able to use OpenType Versions at all, must additionaly install Adobe's Type Manager Light.
From this follows, in particular, that a user of Windows 95/98/NT, unless he/she specifically wishes to use OpenType versions, he/she can avoid installing Adobe's Type Manager Light by installing TrueType versions.
Changes that I propose:
I will now write between quotes a piece of text I will name "Extract-changed", which I propose as an improvement to Extract:
"
Windows 95/98/NT/2000/XP; Vista
-------------------------------
Note that in at least Vista, XP and 2000, the OpenType versions perform much
better than, and are recommended over, the TrueType ones.
1) From the Start menu, open Control Panels
2) Drag-n-drop font files onto Fonts control panel
You may get a dialog saying
"Windows needs your permission to continue"
a) Click Continue
The font installation is similar to Vista.
You can install and use TrueType versions.
You can install OpenType versions, but you won't be able to use them unless you have installed in your system Adobe's Type Manager Light - a software by Adobe Systems Inc, USA.
Adobe's Type Manager Light is proprietary software and, as far as we know, there is no free software substitute.
We, the developers of GNU FreeFont, consider that, by using proprietary software, the user of it is attempting against his/her own freedom and dignity.
You can find information about the philosophy of free software in the Free Software Foundation's web page http://www.fsf.org
You can avoid installing Adobe's Type Manager Light by choosing to install TrueType versions.
Though we do not encourage the use of proprietary software, we are aware that you may find yourself in a situation where you are forced by circumstances to use OpenType versions.
If this is the case, you can try finding a free software font other than GNU FreeFont which will allow you using OpenType whitout the need to install additional proprietary software.
You can consider as well changing your operating system to a free software one which suppports OpenType versions, avoiding thus not only the need to use additonal proprietary software, as also the proprietary operating system that is Windows 95/98/NT. You can find information on available free software operating systems in GNU Project's web page http://www.gnu.org
"
I will now quote a piece of text from Extract-changed:
"
If this is the case, you can try finding a free software font other than GNU FreeFont which will allow you using OpenType whitout the need to install additional proprietary software.
"
I don't know if the fact that one must install Adobe's Type Manager in order to use GNU FreeFont OpenType in Windows 95/98/NT is a particular of GNU FreeFont or of OpenType.
If it's a particular of GNU FreeFont, then perhaps there could be another font (also developed in the spirit of free software) whose OpenType versions do not force one to install additional software, and even if they do, there is a piece of free software that does the job. In this case, the quoted piece of text should remain in Extract-changed.
If it's a particular of OpenType, then the quoted piece of text should be erased from Extract-changed.
GENERAL DISCUSSION
One day a newcomer arrived to my village and asked me "What's the way to the next town?" I could have told him very simply "That way." and continue tilling my piece of land. But I didn't know if he knew the full consequences of going that way. So I felt it was my moral duty to tell him instead "That is the way. But be aware that you will have to cross treacherous swamps and deep dark forests swarming with fierce beasts. If you value your life and integrity, you should resign from going." Now, he went that way after all. I guess he had his reasons to do it. But at least my soul was in peace with that.
Millions of people use computers, and so many million different reasons there is why they use them.
There's the boy who needs his computer to look for a job, to send applications. He's unemployed. He lives alone and has very few friends. He would like to install a free software OS but he's afraid of doing that by himrself, since for him the inner wheels of a computer are product of misterious craft. What if something goes wrong? He can't afford losing his computer even for a day. He could buy a second computer and experiment with it. A good dream indeed. Most days his bowl is empty. Buy a new computer... And yet he tries as he can. He tries as much as possible that his user applications are free software. That's easy: download, push twice and follow instructions. Now he has openoffice, for instance. He is free now in that part of his life. And he hopes one day he will be free in all parts of his life and dreams of it. And he's just one in millions.
I will now quote a piece of text from Issue:
"
It is available for download without cost from Adobe's web site.
"
This is the classic saying that misleads people to think that since someone's giving it for free, let's go and get it.
When it's about apples on the marketplace, it's perfectly all right.
When it's about putting at risk two of our dearest treasures: freedom and dignity, it's far from all right.
The fact the a piece of proprietary software is costless is no incentive nor consolation.
If one finds him/herself in a situation when he/she is forced to use a piece of proprietary software and he/she will have to resign of some of his/her freedom and dignity, there is no consolation at all in that he/she gets it for no money. Though that person may be in the most terrible need for money for the most basic needs.
When I consider the issue of free software versus proprietary software, I see as irrelevant how much software costs. There is plenty of proprietary software that costs nothing and there is some free software for which one must pay, at least if one wishes to get it from a certain source.
Also having a piece of free software available on the internet for no cost may not always be the cheapest way for many people to obtain the software they need. In many parts of the world, internet access is impossible, and if possible it can be unbelievably slow and excessively expensive. Instead, one can easily go to the nearest merchant and get an illegal copy of a piece of proprietary software by an affordable price. But someone in such a region of the world may consider that his/her freedom and dignity are valuable enough as to sacrifice more of his/her money (if he/she can: in many circumstances one can't) and tries accessing the internet for downloading, thus spending a lot more on free software than he/she would on proprietary, for a question of principle.
As long as the free software philosophy is concerned:
To be free, or to be slave? That is the question.
To pay or not to pay? That is not the question.
Best regards.
Alisa Bezkresta
|