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

Re: [OT] Free software vs non-free, here we go again

Le nonidi 9 vendémiaire, an CCXXIV, Reco a écrit :
> 'Open-source' by itself does not imply that the software is free (as in
> libre).
> A fine example of such software is RAR archiver.
> They give you the source - https://packages.debian.org/stretch/rar
> They forbid you to change it. They require you to buy the software after
> a certain time of usage, or uninstall it.
> They rightfully put RAR into non-free in Debian, because the software is
> 'non-free' indeed. But - it's definitely 'open-source'.

Apparently, you are mistaken about what "Open Source" means. "Open Source"
is a trademark, it corresponds to a precise definition published by the Open
Source Initiative. The difference between Open Source and Libre software is
very minute, almost as minute as the difference between the various
definitions of Libre software (four essential freedoms according to the FSF,
DFSG, etc.).

In practice, you can find licenses that are Open Source but not Libre, but
you have to search carefully. I seem to remember that one of the licenses
from apple was in that case due to an obligation to publish modifications in
a certain way, but I do not remember the specifics.


  Nicolas George

Reply to: