(Editor's update: The translation is finally finished. You really have to live in Latin America for a while to appreciate my plight in getting this done. For example, my connection was down for a day, and when I went to the only nearby Internet cafe to work, it was one which had turned into a Karaoke bar for the day. I found it impossible to concentrate while listening to the tech support girl singing Spanish Reggae at the top of her lungs. - Willy Smith, Costa Rica)

Makypress Page (Spanish)

Misconceptions about Free Software, BY Jesus GLEZ. BARAHONA (*)

The 3 of June of 2003 the Vanguard was published in the newspaper, of Barcelona, an interesting letter. It was written (apparently) by a computer science student, and in it was declared, for example, that free software denies intellectual property rights to computer science engineers; he proclaimed he would defend free software if there were also free floors and free painters, and ends up by complaining about those who would defend that the product of their work not be remunerated. ..... Reading this letter, and supposing that indeed a student of some School or Faculty of Computer science wrote it, I embarked upon a deep reflection about what we are teaching to our students; on how free software continues to be a stranger even between professionals, or professional future computer scientists; and in general, on the sea and the fish, as usually happens to me. Luckily, once I was able to leave this deep of reflection and passed on to one which is a little more productive, the one of lucid writing... The result of the short time which I stayed in that state, before continuing on to deep relaxation, immediately follows.

WHY ARE THERE SO MANY MISTAKEN IDEAS?

The world of free software assumes such a great change from the status quo that itis normal that many people do not understand it, if they don't take the time to stop and study it. Most of what is happening is perfectly reasonable, it is simply in the realm of "common sense". But after living many years in a world with strange rules (that is, the one of the industry of propietary software) causes that the most reasonable thing seems strange to us. In addition, many speak only about what they've heard, others only making assumptions, so it is easy to draw mistaken conclusions when this is you point of departure.

Thus taking the bull by the horns, I will comment on some of these conclusions, in my opinion totally mistaken, but which are unfortunately heard all the time. Of course, all this is my opinion, so let me know if it agrees with yours.

FREE SOFTWARE IS A VOLUNTARY THING ITS FANS DO IN THEIR FREE TIME

There is much free software developed by volunteers, and much free software developed during the free time of its authors. But also there is much free software developed during working hours by people paid to develop it. According to studies already done, an enormous part of free software is constructed and maintained by computer science professionals, not by amateurs who have neither education nor experience. Programs like OpenOffice, Mozilla, Evolution and many others have been planned, developed and soon released fundamentally by companies, and therefore by professionals paid by them (although of course also there have been contributions of volunteers). In other projects, like Apache or Linux, many of the developers are paid by their companies to participate in them.

At least so far, free software allows the coexistence of voluntary contributions along with resources dedicated by companies to the creation of programs and their maintenance. As we will see in another section, this cooperative contribution is not necessarily altruistic, and for that reason we can say that we are seeing a stranger (and very fruitful) combination of altruism and economic interest; and that this is one of the roots of the great variety that we enjoy in the community of free software.

FREE SOFTWARE IS BAD FOR PROFESSIONALS

In the world of the proprietary software, almost all developers are put under rules which the company for which they work imposes upon them. These rules normally prevent even speaking about what they are doing with their colleagues from other companies. In the world of free software, even if you work for a company that delineates the objectives which you are to follow, the fruit of your work is not hidden in the archives of your employer, but becomes public so that everybody can see it. For this reason alone, it could already be be said that the professional developers gain much with free software. But normally, the greater concern of computer science professionals (or future professionals) is about the possibility of employment, or how to make a living by their profession. Somehow, there are some who have the perception that because free software doesn't cost anything, there is no way in which a professional can make a living from it. Naturally, the incorrect supposition is that free software doesn't cost anything. It can be inexpensive, so that in many cases the acquisition cost is even zero; but that does not mean that there are no costs. The maintenance, integration, consultancy, etc., continue to be there, and with many more possibilities than there are in the world of proprietary software. And also there is much development done by paid professionals, or companies that have it in their business model.

In fact, from another point of view, free software allows the appearance of new businesses, and with them new possibilities for computer science professionals. And these opportunities can be much more distributed geographically. But this is something that we comment on in the following section.

FREE SOFTWARE GOES AGAINST INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

Without a doubt in the world of free software, as in other sectors of the society, there are those who don't like the present laws concerning the rights of authors. Without a doubt in the world of free software, as in other sectors of society, there are some who think that the line of reason was crossed a long time ago, and that we have to look for a balance with the rights of the consumer of intellectual works. Without a doubt in the world of free software, as in another sectors of the society, there are some who think that the legislation on intellectual property is becoming an enormous obstacle to creativity and innovation. But in general, the community of free software is one which respects intellectual property the most, because this is its realm of operation.

It is important to realize, for starters, that all free software is subject to the laws concerning the rights of authors. Indeed what a free license does, taking account of the possibilities that legislation gives to the authors, is to guarantee certain "ights" for the created program. Usually, except for special licenses, a program cannot be modified nor be redistributed. This is exactly what the author of free software program does; he uses a special license which gives those permissions. But there is more: when is is desirable to put conditions which recognize those liberties (as it is the case of the GPL license), only the rights that these intellecutal property laws allow allow what can be done.

By all this, in the world of free software there is usually scrupulous recognition of authors' rights (although the authors who write free software continue to be obviously authors), and with the desires of those authors (in the form of a license). What, of course, this does not mean (but what many in the world think)that when speaking of intellectual property, it is far better (for the author and the consumer) to share that to block the access, to spread that to restrict, and to collaborate and to compete rather than hide and to monopolize.

WHERE THERE IS FREE SOFTWARE, THERE IS NO BUSINESS

Due to the image of "voluntary development", one can forget that free software offers many opportunities of business. Enormous companies, like IBM, already have achieved it for a long time, and they are trying to convert, as a fundamental part of their busines model, into suppliers of solutions based on free software. Many other firms, small and large, are trying to position themselves in different places. There are new possibilities in development, maintenance, integration, consultancy, certification, education... Many are already proving how to live with a business model based on some aspect of free software, and many more will do it in the next few years. After times of uncertainty, the classic companies of free software, like RedHat, are beginning to reap benefits. And accordingly we are understanding better how this realm works, and more opportunities are appearing.

Yes, we are exploring a new territory. There are no formulas, and there is much to do when one finds a site where there are clients interested in dedicating resources to free software. But preciesly because of this, the opportunities are manifold: almost everything needs to be done... If there is a track to follow, it could be summarized as a change: free software proposes to change from a model of closed and unmodifiable software to a model of software which is open and is infinitely personalizeable. To change this idea into a source of income is, without a doubt, the key to find a business.

IF IT IS DONE BY VOLUNTEERS, IT CANNOT BE GOOD

To begin with, there are many things are done by volunteers which most (or at least many) consider to be good. But this is not the main reason to trust free software. By analyzing the characteristics of the models of development of free software we can reach the conclusion that the quality of the developed programs can be very good. Still we are learning about these processes of development, but the described mechanisms help in this search for quality. Several free products are recognized as very good in production surroundings. Or there are many places where it has to be explained carefully that Linux, Apache or OpenOffice are not sufficient, even though their quality is not in doubt. In general, in the world of free software, just as in the proprietary, there are some very good, and some very bad products, and everything in between. But there are differences. For example, it would be difficult for a free product of bad quality to prosper and become popular (a thing that doesn't always happen in the world of the propietary software): in the world of free software there is much competition, and if a product is the worst one, that's what gets noticed. And if it does get noticed, and there is no improvement in its quality, is very possible that a "fork" happens (appearance of a derived project), taken over by developers who are displeased the main line of development. And finally, we should not forget that in many cases free software is not developed by volunteers, or not only, as I have indicated previously. Which does not necessarily say anything with respect to the quality of the developers...

FREE SOFTWARE NEVER WILL HAVE CERTAIN TYPES OF APPLICATIONS

This is an objection that there is no way to counter until the things change, when this type of free applications appears. At one point, (already many years ago), one of the dominions that "never would have competitive free applications" was the one of complete operating systems. Until Linux kernels and free versions of the BSD were a reality, it was not allowed to speak of this subject. Later came corporative servers ("they will never compete with UNIX, and later with NT, in this arena"). Today it is more than obvious that at a minimum the free solutions are to be considered in this environment. Next it was the desktop and the office automation. KDE, GNOME and OpenOffice have also radically changed these areas. What will be the next area where will there will be no competitive applications of free software?

FREE SOFTWARE DOES NOT HAVE SUPPORT

This one is one of the most silly objections, from my point of view. Because we are going to see, where is the support of the manufacturer in many propietary products? In the world of free software, not only do you have support available, but you have competition in the support market. Not only the manufacturer can offer certain types of service (those that have the source code of the program, and are able to modify them), but any company or professional, with the adequate knowledge, can do it. What is more: service to the user is without a doubt one of the most promising businesses in the world of free software. Not only adaptations and personalization can become a product, but maintenance can be provided exactly to the proportion of the user's needs. Already there are several companies that are beginning to offer this type of service, and by adapting to the market it is maturing. As the market size of free software increases, other new ones will appear. If there is a reasonable objection, in any case, it is along these lines: there are not yet a sufficient number of companies to choose from, mainly depending on the geographic area and the exact domain of the application. But this is, in my opinion, just a matter of time. It could be that the company that you need for a certain type of support or service doesn't yet exist. But do not worry, it will appear shortly. In fact, if you have realized that deficiency, perhaps you should be the one who starts up it - why not?

WRITE YOUR OWN OBJECTION HERE

This is a sample of the mistaken ideas about free software which are heard in the newspaper. Or rather, of the ideas that are erroneous at least as I see them. Surely you have heard many more. If that's true, I encourage you to tell me about them. Perhaps we could then write a document which is a little more complete, including the arguments to explain to those who are interested why free software is "not what they think". And perhaps in this way we help a little to keep somebody from getting lost, or to be badly informed, about everything that free software can offer.

(*) Jesus Glez. Barahona, Prof. Univ. "King Juan Carlos" Published and extracted of the magazine All Linux