Defining Free Software Business

[Alfred M. Szmidt]

   It might even make certain members of this list understand how
   non-free is not part of debian's OS

Non-free is clearly part of Debian.  Debian/SPI/ftpmasters are legally
responsible for whatever is put into non-free.

   and how it can be used to help get more free software,

One does not get more people using free software by saying: Here, have
some non-free software as well.

   But will the FSF's ambivalence towards debian allow us to use these
   handy and familiar labels?

The FSF has never had mixed feelings towards Debian, the stance has
always been quite clear: 100% free software.  Something that Debian
once along time achived, but not anymore.

The labels might be handy since they allow a practical means of
getting more businesses listed.  But this shouldn't be the goal of the
GBN.  The goal should be to promote 100% free software, anything else
undermines the goal for our freedom.

If you have a business that supports non-free software then users will
go to that business to get that support.  It would be better if the
business only supported a _way_to_move_ from non-free software to free
software for users, and clearly saying that it does not condone of
non-free software.

Cheers.