Copyleft/guide
6
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

Replace editorial commentary w/ FSF's link.

Browse source 
My personal comment here, which I wrote on 2003-05-26 (see
f05ce6c657 ), is probably not particularly
useful.  I still tend to use the phrasing as original stated in the
removed text herein; however, I'm admittedly the only one.  I don't deny
that I hope to coin some terminology usage through my work on this
Guide, but this particular use of "nonfree software" to mean
"noncommercially proprietary" is not so important IMO that this Guide
must coin it.

The FSF's page on this doesn't make that distinction, and has much more
detail on this issue than this section does.  Therefore, the
personal statement is removed, and the organizational statement on the
FSF's site is instead linked to.
This commit is contained in:
Bradley M. Kuhn 2014-12-20 19:52:42 -05:00
parent 628ffb6020
commit c5866203ee
1 changed files with 6 additions and 8 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

14
gpl-lgpl.tex
View file

@ -195,14 +195,12 @@ activities are considered non-free. The Open Source Initiative
(\defn{OSI}) (the arbiter of what is considered ``Open Source'') also regards
such licenses as inconsistent with its ``Open Source Definition''.
In general, software for which any of these freedoms are
restricted in any way is called ``nonfree'' (or as I prefer to write it, ``non-Free'') software. Some use the
term ``proprietary software'' more or less interchangeably with
``non-Free software.'' Personally, I tend to use the term ``non-Free
software'' to refer to software available noncommercially that restricts freedom
(such as ``shareware'') and ``proprietary software'' to refer to
commercial software that restricts freedom (such as nearly all of
Microsoft's and Oracle's offerings).
In general, software for which any of these freedoms are restricted in any
way is called ``nonfree'' software. Some use the term ``proprietary
software'' more or less interchangeably with ``nonfree software''. The FSF
published a useful
\href{http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/categories.html}{explanation of various
types of software and how they relate to one another}.
Keep in mind that none of the terms ``software freedom'', ``open source''
and ``free software'' are known to be trademarked or otherwise legally