On Sun, 27 May 2007, Francesco Poli wrote: > On Wed, 23 May 2007 22:05:54 +0100 Anthony W. Youngman wrote: > [...] > > If you use the word "proprietary", you are merely echoing the > > terminology used/popularised by Microsoft - do you remember their > > marketing slogan "Unix is proprietary, Windows is open"? > > > > If you use the word "proprietary" correctly, then linux is > > proprietary. "proprietary" means "has an owner" (which ALL > > copyrighted works do). The opposite of "proprietary" is "Public > > Domain". > > Sorry, but I have to disagree. > > Whatever the its origin is[1], the term "proprietary" is now a > well-established[2] word used as opposed to "free" (as in freedom).
And no, it's not a well-established word in that regard. Like many terms in the Copyright/Trademark/Patent rights space, it gets missused by people who are not familiar with it and haven't bothered to consult a dictionary. > Free == grants all the important freedoms (see the FSD or the DFSG) > Proprietary == non-free If you mean non-free, just say non-free. Don't use confusing terms like proprietary, which belongs on the closed/open axis, not the free/non-free axis. Non-free is even shorter that proprietary, so your fingers will thank you. Don Armstrong -- Build a fire for a man, an he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. -- Jules Bean http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
