1<?xml version='1.0'?> 2<!DOCTYPE appendix PUBLIC "-//OASIS//DTD DocBook XML V4.5//EN" 3 "http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/xml/4.5/docbookx.dtd" 4[ ]> 5 6<appendix id="appendix.free" xreflabel="Free"> 7<?dbhtml filename="appendix_free.html"?> 8 9<appendixinfo> 10 <keywordset> 11 <keyword> 12 ISO C++ 13 </keyword> 14 <keyword> 15 library 16 </keyword> 17 </keywordset> 18</appendixinfo> 19 20<title> 21 Free Software Needs Free Documentation 22 <indexterm> 23 <primary>Appendix</primary> 24 <secondary>Free Documentation</secondary> 25 </indexterm> 26</title> 27 28<para> 29The biggest deficiency in free operating systems is not in the 30software--it is the lack of good free manuals that we can include in 31these systems. Many of our most important programs do not come with 32full manuals. Documentation is an essential part of any software 33package; when an important free software package does not come with a 34free manual, that is a major gap. We have many such gaps today. 35</para> 36 37<para> 38Once upon a time, many years ago, I thought I would learn Perl. I got 39a copy of a free manual, but I found it hard to read. When I asked 40Perl users about alternatives, they told me that there were better 41introductory manuals--but those were not free. 42</para> 43 44<para> 45Why was this? The authors of the good manuals had written them for 46O'Reilly Associates, which published them with restrictive terms--no 47copying, no modification, source files not available--which exclude 48them from the free software community. 49</para> 50 51<para> 52That wasn't the first time this sort of thing has happened, and (to 53our community's great loss) it was far from the last. Proprietary 54manual publishers have enticed a great many authors to restrict their 55manuals since then. Many times I have heard a GNU user eagerly tell 56me about a manual that he is writing, with which he expects to help 57the GNU project--and then had my hopes dashed, as he proceeded to 58explain that he had signed a contract with a publisher that would 59restrict it so that we cannot use it. 60</para> 61 62<para> 63Given that writing good English is a rare skill among programmers, we 64can ill afford to lose manuals this way. 65</para> 66 67<para> 68 Free documentation, like free software, is a matter of freedom, 69not price. The problem with these manuals was not that O'Reilly 70Associates charged a price for printed copies--that in itself is fine. 71(The Free Software Foundation <ulink url="http://www.gnu.org/doc/doc.html">sells printed copies</ulink> of 72free GNU manuals, too.) But GNU manuals are available in source code 73form, while these manuals are available only on paper. GNU manuals 74come with permission to copy and modify; the Perl manuals do not. 75These restrictions are the problems. 76</para> 77 78<para> 79The criterion for a free manual is pretty much the same as for free 80software: it is a matter of giving all users certain freedoms. 81Redistribution (including commercial redistribution) must be 82permitted, so that the manual can accompany every copy of the program, 83on-line or on paper. Permission for modification is crucial too. 84</para> 85 86<para> 87As a general rule, I don't believe that it is essential for people to 88have permission to modify all sorts of articles and books. The issues 89for writings are not necessarily the same as those for software. For 90example, I don't think you or I are obliged to give permission to 91modify articles like this one, which describe our actions and our 92views. 93</para> 94 95<para> 96But there is a particular reason why the freedom to modify is crucial 97for documentation for free software. When people exercise their right 98to modify the software, and add or change its features, if they are 99conscientious they will change the manual too--so they can provide 100accurate and usable documentation with the modified program. A manual 101which forbids programmers to be conscientious and finish the job, or 102more precisely requires them to write a new manual from scratch if 103they change the program, does not fill our community's needs. 104</para> 105 106<para> 107While a blanket prohibition on modification is unacceptable, some 108kinds of limits on the method of modification pose no problem. For 109example, requirements to preserve the original author's copyright 110notice, the distribution terms, or the list of authors, are ok. It is 111also no problem to require modified versions to include notice that 112they were modified, even to have entire sections that may not be 113deleted or changed, as long as these sections deal with nontechnical 114topics. (Some GNU manuals have them.) 115</para> 116 117<para> 118These kinds of restrictions are not a problem because, as a practical 119matter, they don't stop the conscientious programmer from adapting the 120manual to fit the modified program. In other words, they don't block 121the free software community from making full use of the manual. 122</para> 123 124<para> 125However, it must be possible to modify all the <emphasis>technical</emphasis> 126content of the manual, and then distribute the result in all the usual 127media, through all the usual channels; otherwise, the restrictions do 128block the community, the manual is not free, and so we need another 129manual. 130</para> 131 132<para> 133Unfortunately, it is often hard to find someone to write another 134manual when a proprietary manual exists. The obstacle is that many 135users think that a proprietary manual is good enough--so they don't 136see the need to write a free manual. They do not see that the free 137operating system has a gap that needs filling. 138</para> 139 140<para> 141Why do users think that proprietary manuals are good enough? Some 142have not considered the issue. I hope this article will do something 143to change that. 144</para> 145 146<para> 147Other users consider proprietary manuals acceptable for the same 148reason so many people consider proprietary software acceptable: they 149judge in purely practical terms, not using freedom as a criterion. 150These people are entitled to their opinions, but since those opinions 151spring from values which do not include freedom, they are no guide for 152those of us who do value freedom. 153</para> 154 155<para> 156Please spread the word about this issue. We continue to lose manuals 157to proprietary publishing. If we spread the word that proprietary 158manuals are not sufficient, perhaps the next person who wants to help 159GNU by writing documentation will realize, before it is too late, that 160he must above all make it free. 161</para> 162 163<para> 164We can also encourage commercial publishers to sell free, copylefted 165manuals instead of proprietary ones. One way you can help this is to 166check the distribution terms of a manual before you buy it, and 167prefer copylefted manuals to non-copylefted ones. 168</para> 169<para> 170[Note: We now maintain a <ulink url="http://www.fsf.org/licensing/doc/other-free-books.html">web page 171that lists free books available from other publishers</ulink>]. 172</para> 173 174<para>Copyright © 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007 Free Software Foundation, Inc., 51 Franklin Street, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110-1301, USA</para> 175 176<para>Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire article are 177permitted worldwide, without royalty, in any medium, provided this 178notice is preserved.</para> 179 180<para>Report any problems or suggestions to <email>webmaster@fsf.org</email>.</para> 181 182</appendix> 183