free-sw.html version 1.11

date: 2001-12-21 17:06:31 +0000;  author: rms;  state: Exp;  lines: +21 -16;
Say that "if you distribute, you must send a copy to original developer
on request" is ok.


Index: free-sw.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/free-sw.html,v
retrieving revision 1.10
retrieving revision 1.11
diff -U 2 -r1.10 -r1.11
--
++ free-sw.html	17 Oct	21 Dec 2001 08:05:44 17:06:31 -0000	1.10	1.11
@@ -86,6 +86,7 @@
forms of the program, as well as source code, for both modified and
unmodified versions.  It is ok if there is no way to produce a binary
or executable form, form (since some languages don't support that feature),
but people you must have the freedom to redistribute such forms should they you
find or develop a way to make them.

<P>
@@ -114,10 +115,10 @@
your copies, you always have the freedom to copy and change the
software, even to <A HREF="/philosophy/selling.html">sell copies</A>.
<P>

``Free software'' does not mean ``non-commercial''.  A free program
must be available for commercial use. use, commercial development, and
commercial distribution.  Commercial development of free software is
no longer unusual; such programs are free commercial
software. software is very important.

<P>
@@ -127,5 +128,7 @@
make it available in that way also'' can be acceptable too, on the
same condition.  (Note that such a rule still leaves you the choice of
whether to publish the program or not.)  It is also acceptable for the
license to require that, if you have distributed a modified version
and a previous developer asks for a copy of it, you must send one.

<P>
@@ -172,9 +175,9 @@
license includes unconscionable restrictions, we reject it, even if we
did not anticipate the issue in these criteria.  Sometimes a license
requirement raises an issue that calls for extensive thought thought,
including discussions with a lawyer, before we can decide if the
requirement is acceptable, including discussions
with a lawyer. acceptable.  When we reach a conclusion, conclusion about a new
issue, we sometimes often update these criteria to make it easier to see why
certain licenses do or don't qualify.

<P>
@@ -192,7 +195,9 @@

<P>
Another group has started using the term <A
HREF="free-software-for-freedom.html"> open source</A> "open source" to mean
something close (but not identical) to "free software".  We prefer the
term "free software" because, once you have heard it refers to freedom
rather than price, <A HREF="free-software-for-freedom.html">it calls
to mind freedom</A>.

<HR>
@@ -244,5 +249,5 @@
Updated:
<!-- timestamp start -->
$Date: 2026/01/28 17:24:09 $ $Author: ineiev $
<!-- timestamp end -->
<HR>