GNU Business Network Definition comments

Sat Jun 24 12:59:09 UTC 2006

I had initially suggested three types of ideas that might need to
underpin the GBN classification concepts:
(1) Any GBN term, reference or certification must be watertight against
misapplication or abuse.
(2) Within the context of the above the GBN needs to provide a
methodology of entry for firms that currently provide sales, support or
services for software that is not free.
(3) The GBN needs to ensure that companies who operate completely
according to the ideals of the four freedoms and the Gnu Manifesto will
be rewarded for their accomplishment.

You also pointed out the need to consider those who have "aided someone
else who lives by the four freedoms and supports the GNU manifesto; i.e.
merely a 'friend.'"  A valid point.  There may be companies, groups or
individuals who provide vital support services to Free Software
projects.  They are as much a part of the Free Software ecosystem as
anyone else but their contribution might be unrelated to actually
developing Free Software 'in-house.'

This suggests that four ideas need to underpin the GBN classification
concepts:

(1) Any term, reference or certification must be watertight against
misapplication or abuse. Each term, reference or certification must
therefore support both the four freedoms and the Gnu Manifesto without
exception.
(2) Within the context of the above the GBN needs to provide a
methodology of entry for firms that currently provide sales, support or
services for software that is not free.  In other words, there should be
a method for ensuring that companies that wish to become free can do so.
(3) Within the context of (1) the GBN needs to provide a methodology of
entry or form of formal recognition for firms that indirectly contribute
to the protection and expansion of the four freedoms and the Gnu Manifesto.
(4) The GBN needs to ensure that companies who operate completely
according to the ideals of the four freedoms and the Gnu Manifesto will
be rewarded for their accomplishment.

(2) and (3) are natural avenues for attempted abuse or misapplication,
but at the same time they provide a way to allow the GBN to penetrate
deeply into established companies through conversion and positive
engagement.  If handled correctly:
(2) will allow companies to convert to ethical software
(3) will ensure long-term supporters will engage directly with the GBN

In the existing GNU Business Network Definition (version 0.9.10,
http://mail.fsfeurope.org/pipermail/gnubiz-disc/2000-December/000014.html)
there might not be enough provision for allowing companies that
currently deploy and support un-free software (type (2) above) to
convert to Free Software.  On the other hand, as has been pointed out
more than once on this thread, giving too much provision is
automatically opening the GBN to potential abuse.

One idea that has been floating around this thread is to have different
types of membership to provide access to different types of group.  This
could take the form of stepped membership
(A) Pure Free Software company and Gnu champion
(B) Transition company making the switch from un-free to Free Software
(C) Free Software supporter

I believe the general concept of having different types of membership is
quite attractive.  It does not try to put everyone into one box and
that's a good idea in light of the complexity of the ICT market.  In
Europe alone we're looking at a market that addresses 375 million people
and is spread across 25 nations.  Diversity is the watchword.  That
being said, the method of classifying companies and the wording applied
to the classifications is of vital importance.

Example:
(A) Pure Free Software company and Gnu champion
'Pure Free Software company' appears clear enough.  This is indicative
of a company that uses, creates, deploys and supports *only* Free
Software.  But how far does that go?  What's on the mobile phones that
the employees use for business?  A mobile phone is a computer.  It can
use Free Software.  My own mobile phone is a Nokia.  It does not use
Free Software.
'Gnu champion' is very vague.  What does that really mean?  A company
that follows the Gnu Manifesto?  But surely it is possible to follow the
Manifesto with more or less enthusiasm.  Not every participant in the
Gnu network is a champion, for if everyone was a champion it would be
impossible to differentiate between supporters of Free Software.  Ergo
that term is as meaningless as a term found between the covers of a
motivational self-help book.  It is overly positive without actually
being indicative of anything.

Let's rethink the wording a little bit:
(A) A company that develops, deploys and supports only Free Software and
believes the four freedoms and Gnu Manifesto to be central to the
company mission.

That sounds a little bit more reasonable.  It's using Maffulli's ethical
approach to determine a Free Software Business.  After initially feeling
skeptical about the utility of applying ethics to business adoption of
Free Software I have found myself agreeing with the concept.  It appears
to be a robust way of ensuring that a business is actually a Free
Software business.

Is (A) a reasonable term?  Perhaps it merits deconstruction from others.
 This also leaves the wording of (B) and (C) open to debate and
reconstruction.  I will leave it here for a while.  It's time for coffee
and perhaps some ramen.

I would suggest that once the ideals of the GBN are decided the actual
wording of the documents underpinning it are likely to be a matter for
legal advisors on both sides of the Atlantic (at the very least).
Loop-holes, inferred meanings and missing clauses are not something that
can be risked.  It would be a tad messy if Microsoft ended up applying
for GBN membership :)  At the same time it's so vitally important that
the GBN is accessible.  The wording of its constitution and membership
documents must be legible to those considering or seeking membership.

Shane

- --
Shane Martin Coughlan
e: shane at opendawn.com
m: +447773180107 (UK) +353862262570 (Ire)
w: www.opendawn.com
- ---
OpenPGP: http://www.opendawn.com/shane/publickey.asc
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

iQCVAwUBRJ03HdwG3M95JPpzAQhrgwQArTOr/yD7r9QUlCHfvkcPVfUKsmWUtW7p
C8+xHEi1vX4PB47i4MmfIhJxz7u+jfbvRnwq57Qxjxz1MssWV0NX/iwzHyztWhZ+
MYTJVp4x0jV0/gcv8CNKyN+LEUEVMllf7R8l08x15dXwfCpkXnUUkhVeYgCJ0TEc
dyJVvYRL3bc=
=H2gU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----