Re: FSF, terminology, and marketing

[Brian Cameron <Brian Cameron Sun COM>]

Paul:

> My point is that we are being asked (or recommended) that we following 
> their naming guidelines.  My point is how does the FSF respect GNOME - I 
> am wiling to bet $100 a normal user couldn't find the 
> http://directory.fsf.org/project/gnome/ link - you have to go their 
> searchable database from a very small "Resources" link in the middle 
> bottom of their page and manually put in GNOME.  Our desktop environment 
> is arguably the 3rd most popular in the world after Windows and Mac OS X 
> (thanks Ubuntu!) yet that's not mentioned anywhere on websites run by 
> the FSF.  Unfortunately, irony in my original email doesn't communicate 
> well.

A fair point.  If this is a concern, though, have we made any efforts to
ask (or recommend) that the FSF do something to address this?  I would
be happy to bring this up with the FSF if we are interested in seeing
what can be done to make GNOME more visible on their website.

> I understand our history, and am even presenting on it next week.  Let 
> me re-phrase the question:  What exactly is a "GNU Project"?  What 
> implications does that tie GNOME to the FSF, 

I am not sure I am the best person to answer that question, really.
Having said that, I would say that the FSF defines GNU licensing, which
is the licensing we primarily use in our software.  So, as you probably
know, there is some connection.

> who, in my opinion, despite 
> everything they have done over the last 25 years, are earning themselves 
> a negative reputation with poorly conceived campaigns like Windows 7 
> Sins?  As someone mentioned to me earlier today, we can have free 
> licensing and free software without having to be a part of the FSF.

Of course, we have the freedom to disagree with the FSF and to choose to 
not follow certain recommendations, or to not support FSF projects
that we feel are damaging.  I was never trying to suggest otherwise.

In bringing up this topic, I am not trying to suggest that we do not
already do a lot to promote those values we share with the FSF.  For
example, we are responsible for distributing a tremendously successful
GNU licensed desktop which, as you highlight, is very successful - the
3rd most popular in the world.  This, in and of itself, is probably the 
most significant thing that we already do to promote those values.
We also do things like promote Software Freedom Day, do things like the
Women's Outreach Program, and many other things.  Perhaps what we do
already is enough, and we need do no more.

> While I am jealous of their ability to market campaigns and the funding 
> they have available, especially being a member of the GNOME marketing 
> team, my recommendation would be to distance ourselves from the FSF 
> rather than get closer.

I do not think this is a black and white issue.  While there may be
certain aspects of the FSF that we may choose to distance ourselves
from, there are also many shared values that do connect us.

> I wish I could remember the blog post, article, or talk that was given 
> that pointed out that GNOME may have been an acronym 10 years ago when 
> founded, but it's not applicable today.  John Palmieri in his talk at 
> GUADEC and recent GNOME Journal article argues the same thing that the 
> "N" for "Network" doesn't apply either  I am more than aware of what the 
> acronym is, thank you very much.

I apologize, I did not mean for my jibe to be taken badly, much the same
way you did not mean for your irony to go unnoticed.  I think you are
doing a great job with GNOME marketing, and the improvements since you
have been involved have been simply tremendous.

> As I stated above, and I'll re-phrase, 
> is there a perceived connotation of being part of the FSF by having the 
> word "GNU" in GNOME?  

I would not say that GNOME is a part of the FSF - they are a separate
organization.  Though we do obviously have a relationship.

> Without knowing what doors might be opened by tightening our 
> relationship with the FSF, I believe that the risks do not outweigh the 
> benefits of being associated with the FSF and I do not have a strong 
> urge to use their naming conventions in GNOME materials.

Personally, I would prefer to focus on those values that we share and
work towards improving relationship in those areas, rather than focus
on those areas where we disagree.

I was just trying to ask a question about what terminology the marketing
team recommends.  I have not talked with the FSF about what
opportunities might exist if we were to work towards improving our
relationship with them.  Without having such a discussion with them, it
seems hard to know.  Though if we think we should distance ourselves
from them, then we may not be in a constructive place to have any such
discussion.

But, just to clarify, are you saying that you recommend that the GNOME
community not use the term "GNU/Linux" in all contexts or just in
marketing materials?  Are you suggesting that using the term "GNU/Linux"
is damaging like the examples you give of the "Windows 7 Sins" and
should be avoided?  Do you think that we should avoid making efforts to
do things that might be seen as tightening our relationship with the FSF
in general?

Brian