[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Free as in speech, but not as in beer


Le 25/03/2015 18:30, Paul van der Vlis a écrit :

>> They're probably doing some crazy AGPL bits on top of more restrictively
>> licensed bits; since they're the copyright holder, they can do that, but
>> it may mean that no one else can actually use and/or distribute the
>> code.
> No, it's plain AGPL v3. But he asks friendly not to remove some code and
> then redistribute.

IMHO, a friendly request for a donation would be more effective and less
likely to get removed in a subsequent fork.

The scheme you are suggesting for this software implies that it is free
(as in speech) only because people have the ability to patch a certain
feature out (take the desert island test to see why:
https://wiki.debian.org/DesertIslandTest ). For practical reasons, I
would not want to have a package in Debian that people need to recompile
or pay or whatever other action to use. They get the binary on DVD, they
install it, they use it.

So, for me, free-as-speech implies free-as-in-beer. If it had to be
written in the Social Contract to be clear, I would vote for such an
amendment. I think that answers your initial question, at least as far
as I am concerned.

Kind regards, Thibaut.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply to: