[[TRAD GNU]] Traduction urgente en français d'un texte de RMS

[Frederic Couchet <fcouchet AT april.org>]

Bonjour,

si quelqu'un est disponible Richard aurait besoin de la traduction en
français du texte ci-joint.

Merci d'avance,
Fred.

--- Begin Message ---

• From: Richard Stallman <rms AT gnu.org>
• To: Frederic Couchet <fcouchet AT april.org>
• To: jeremie AT libreacces.org
• Subject: Traduction?
• Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2011 12:49:49 -0500

Can someone translate this to French in a hurry?


Measures governments can use to promote free software

-- Richard Stallman

The mission of the state is to organize society for the freedom and
well-being of the people. One aspect of this mission, in the
computing field, is to encourage users to adopt free software.

The state needs to insist on free software in its own computing for
the sake of its computational sovereignty (the state's control over
its own computing). All users deserve control over their computing,
but the state has a responsibility to the people to maintain control
over the computing. it does on their behalf.

Secondary benefits of moving state agencies to free software can
include saving money and encouraging local industry.

This article suggests policies for a strong and firm effort to promote
free software within the state, and to lead the rest of the country
towards software freedom.

In this text, "state entities" means public agencies including
schools, public-private partnerships, largely state-funded activities
such as charter schools, and "private" corporations controlled by the
state or established with special privileges or functions by the
state.

The most important policy concerns education, since that shapes
the future of the country:

* Educational activities, or at least those of of state entities, must
teach only free software (thus, they should never lead students to use
a nonfree program), and should teach the civic reasons for insisting
on free software. To teach a nonfree program is to teach dependence,
which is contrary to the mission of the school.

Also crucial are state policies that influence what software
individuals and organizations use:

* Laws and public sector practices must be changed so that they never
require or pressure individuals or organizations to use a nonfree
program.

* Whenever a state entity distributes software to the public,
including programs included in or specified by its web pages, it must
be distributed as free software, and must be capable of running on a
100% free environment.

* State entity web sites and servers must be designed to work well
with 100% free environments on the user's computer.

* State entities must use only file formats and communication
protocols that are well supported by free software, preferably with
published specifications. For example, they must not distribute audio
or video recordings in formats that require Flash or nonfree codecs.
(We do not state this in terms of "standards" because it should apply
to nonstandardized interfaces as well as standardized ones.)

Several policies affect the computational sovereignty of the state.
State entities must maintain control over their computing, not cede
control to private hands. These points apply to all computers,
including smartphones.

* State entities must migrate to free software, and must not install,
or continue using, any nonfree software except under a temporary
exception. Only one agency should have the authority to grant these
temporary exceptions, and only when shown compelling reasons. This
agency's goal should be to reduce the number of exceptions to zero.

* When a state entity pays for development of a computing solution,
the contract must require it be delivered as free software and be
capable of running on a 100% free environment. All contracts must
require this, so that if the developer does not comply with this
requirement, the work cannot be paid for.

* When a state entity buys or leases computers, it must choose among
the models that come closest, in their class, to being capable of
running without any proprietary software. The state should maintain,
for each class of computers, a list of the models authorized based on
this criterion. Models available to both the public and the state
should be preferred to models available only to the state.

* The state should negotiate actively with manufacturers to bring
about the availability in the market (to the state and the public) of
suitable hardware products, in all pertinent product areas, that
require no proprietary software.

* The state should invite other states to negotiate collectively with
manufacturers about suitable hardware products. Together they will
have more clout.

The computational sovereignty (and security) of the state includes
control over the computers that do the state's work. This means
avoiding Software as a Service unless the service is run by another
state agency, as well as other practices that deny the state control
over its computing. Therefore,

* Every computer that the state uses must belong to the state or be
leased by the state, and the state must never cede authority to a
private entity over who has physical access to the computer, who can
do maintenance (hardware or software) on it, or what software should
be installed in it. If the computer is not portable, then while in
use it must be in a physical space of which the state is the occupant
(either as owner or as tenant).

One other policy affects free and nonfree software development:

* The state should encourage developers to create or enhance Free
Software and who make it available to the public, e.g. by tax breaks
and other financial incentive. Contrariwise, no such tax breaks
should be granted for development, distribution or use of non-free
software.

* In particular, proprietary software developers should not be able to
"donate" copies to schools and claim a tax write-off for the nominal
value of the software. Proprietary software is not legitimate in a
school.

With these measures, the state can recover control over its computing,
and lead the country's citizens, businesses and organizations towards
control over their computing.


Copyright 2011 Free Software Foundation
Released under the CC-BY-ND license.


--
Dr Richard Stallman
President, Free Software Foundation
51 Franklin St
Boston MA 02110
USA
www.fsf.org www.gnu.org
Skype: No way! That's nonfree (freedom-denying) software.
Use free telephony http://directory.fsf.org/category/tel/


--- End Message ---

Librement,
Fred.
-- 
frederic AT couchet.org
+33 6 60 68 89 31
http://www.couchet.org/blog
Suivez-moi sur identi.ca : http://identi.ca/fcouchet