[GOAL] Re: libre vs open

Thu Aug 13 16:29:39 BST 2015

I will add my own testimonial support to Hélène's description of what
happened. The discussion among French-speaking OA advocates was strongly
informed by people that had been involved in the free software movement.
Bernard Lang was one of the founders of the AFUL ("Association
francophone des utilisateurs de logiciels libres" - why the second "l"
never appeared remains one of the great post-resurrection
mysteries... :-) ) and so was I. People like Bernard and myself, and
probably others, were acutely aware of the battles between "free
software" - free as "free speech", not as "free beer", Stallman famously
declared - and "open source" software. We all clearly understood the
consequences of not sufficiently foregrounding the issue of freedom and
control. We all pushed for "libre". The result, in French, was "Libre
accès" and not "accès ouvert".

Now, Hélène is also right to say that it is too late now to change
things in English. In a world where new vocabulary is constantly
inserted into the OA debates, which unfortunately muddies the waters, we
should strive for a few, unambiguous, terms such as "libre" vs. "gratis"
to disambiguate "free" in English, and remember that Gold covers two sub
varieties: APC-Gold, and non-APC-Gold (sometimes called, less
transparently, fair Gold). Let us beware of vocabulary such as "open
choice", "hybrid", "public access", etc. Open Access is libre and gratis
access. Full stop.

jcg

-- 

Jean-Claude Guédon
Professeur titulaire
Littérature comparée
Université de Montréal

Le jeudi 13 août 2015 à 16:07 +0200, Hélène.Bosc a écrit :
> 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
> > 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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/eb483fe4/attachment-0001.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: face-smile.png
Type: image/png
Size: 925 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/pipermail/goal/attachments/20150813/eb483fe4/attachment-0001.png 