Re: The LCC is a bad idea, but that doesn't mean the LSB doesn't have any issues

[Bruce Perens <bruce@perens.com>]

Wouter Verhelst wrote:

I don't know what the essense of Free Software is to you;

You do so. I created the DFSG. It defines what the essense of Free Software is not only to me but to this project.

However, to me, the essense of Free Software is that it allows one to
modify the software as one sees fit. Remove that ability, and I don't
see the software as Free anymore.
  

You never lose the right to modify. You lose the right to claim that a modified version is the certified one. I addressed this specifically in DFSG section 4:

The license may require derived works to carry a different name or version number from the original software.

At the time, there was an "Official" version of ABIWord sanctioned by ABISource, and any modified version would be unofficial and had to bear a different name, and DFSG #4 was written specifically to allow that sort of uses. This is certainly a form of certification. Indeed, Debian makes use of similar certification for its Official CD.

    Thanks

    Bruce

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature