[GOAL] Re: libre vs open

Thu Aug 13 15:07:24 BST 2015

Nicolas,

A  small story about “Libre”, specially about the French  « Libre Accès”.

This terminology was decided by the small French translators team to which I belonged and who worked for  the launch of the  website of the Budapest Open Access Initiative, in the beginning of February 2002 http://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/read

The translators team was composed of Viviane Bouletreau (who did the major part of the translation) Jean-Paul  Ducasse,  Jean-Claude Guédon,  Bernard Lang,  Stevan Harnad, and myself. 

In editing the translation, I noticed that “Open Access“  which was  correctly translated by “Accès Ouvert”, was not as explicit as it could be and I suggested “Libre Accès” instead. 

 I remind Bernard Lang working at INRIA. (See INRIA  at http://www.inria.fr/institut/inria-en-bref/inria-en-quelques-mots )  saying : “I agree with you, because as a computer scientist I love all that is LIBRE!!! 

For the D day, that is for the  13 February  2002, only the English and the French version were online . Below some excerpts  from the  French version which is at http://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/translations/french-translation

« Pour diverses raisons, ce type de mise à disposition en ligne gratuit et sans restriction, que nous appelons l'accès libre… 

…L'accès libre à la littérature des revues à comités de lecture est le but. L'auto-archivage (I.) et une nouvelle génération de revues alternatives en libre accès (II…»

After reading this, you can easily understand that I agree with your idea of spreading the word “Libre" but I cannot agree with your idea of changing  the terminology, now. It is too late! 

Have you an idea of the number of documents missing in a Google search if you type only the word “Libre" for asking for “Open”? 

The new comers in the subject will be lost, as usual! What is what ?  This new terminology will not help the progress of “Open “or “Libre” : on the contrary. Furthermore, there is a long story of “Open Access Gratis” and” Open access Libre “(Cf the discussion between Peter Suber and Stevan Harnad in 2008) http://www.sparc.arl.org/resource/gratis-and-libre-open-access 

:  the number of documents you will get in a Google search talking about “Libre Access” will be  restricted to this kind of OA!

A word or a concept is created is by those who proposed it and who stayed in the first place for talking about it during many years. You are 15 years too late! Even in 2002, it was too late to change this "new" terminology.

Best wishes.

Hélène Bosc 

http://open-access.infodocs.eu/hbosc/

Hélène Bosc
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Nicolas Pettiaux" <nicolas at pettiaux.be>
To: "Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci)" <goal at eprints.org>
Cc: "Lawrence Lessig" <lessig at law.harvard.edu>; "Robert Darnton" <robert_darnton at harvard.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2015 7:00 PM
Subject: [GOAL] libre vs open

> Dear all,
> 
> This is only my second message to this list, after the
> self-presentation, written a little earlier today.
> 
> Much discussion on this list, as well as in the literature and in the
> academic world today discuss about Open Access, Open Source, Open
> Innovation, Open Data, Open Educational Resources, Open Curriculum ...
> OPEN something.
> 
> And we have seen the different meanings that people can give to Open
> Access for example, leading to a further precision, Green Open Access
> versus Gold Open Access. Different people have different definitions
> about the single "open" word.
> 
> Such discussion has taken place since a long time in the software
> communities that I know well. it started with "free software" in 1981
> lead by Richard Stallman and Eben Moglen, and the words "open source"
> have been introduced in 1998 by Bruce Perens and Eric Raymond,
> purposedly to answer possible concerns by the "business world" about the
> ambiguity of the English "free", meaning gratis (zero cost) as well as
> libre (as in freedom).
> 
> Richard Stallman, who claims that the ethical aspects are extremely
> important, and I would now support his views, is not pleased at all with
> the extension that the words "open source" have taken, replacing "free
> software" in many mouths and many circumstances.
> 
> In the software communities, we have nearly seen fights and strong
> discussions about such topic, free versus open software.
> 
> In many circles, the adjective "libre", well known and understood in
> Latin derived languages like Spanish and English, as emerged to stress
> the aspect linked to the freedom that one gains, much more than the
> practical and often economical benefits gained thanks to the freedom and
> the derived openness.
> 
> I read that the word "libre" as been more and more accepted in English
> (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libre_(word) ), used to describe
> something as being "free" in the sense of "having freedom" or "liberty"
> and being distinguished fomr the free (as in "no cost")
> 
> I would therefore propose that, as in knowledge and all related works
> and material, it is the freedom and the liberty that is the most
> important (and the derived costless access too, but as derived benefit)
> that we replace all the occurence of "open" by "libre" to consider
> "libre access", "libre educational resources", "libre data", "libre
> knowledge", "libre software" ...
> 
> Such a simple word change could lead to larger semantic changes, and
> even though it could mean new references, and new usages, it could also
> stress some important facts in most readings I have about these topics,
> for example in the book "Open Access" by Peter Suber, that the true
> freedom that the user gains is the one most susceptible to provide
> larger benefits, and profit mankind.
> 
> What do you think about such a proposal ? ( replace all the occurence of
> "open" by "libre" to consider "libre access", "libre educational
> resources", "libre data", "libre knowledge", "libre software" ...)
> 
> I am looking forward to reading from you,
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Nicolas
> 
> -- 
> Nicolas Pettiaux, dr sc
> nicolas at pettiaux.be
> 
>

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

> _______________________________________________
> GOAL mailing list
> GOAL at eprints.org
> http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/pipermail/goal/attachments/20150813/6efbaee0/attachment-0001.html 