would someone kindly clarify this paragaph, please (RH business model)
Robert P. J. Day
rpjday at mindspring.com
Mon Oct 27 08:30:10 UTC 2003
On Mon, 27 Oct 2003, Mike A. Harris wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Oct 2003, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
>
> >> The truth of the matter is, that open source software is ALWAYS
> >> "free" in any definition of the word. Even when you *pay* for
> >> OSS, you have the option of obtaining it at no cost via download
> >> if you desire in source code form at a bare minimum.
> >...
> >
> >say what? i'm not convinced. what if i start a company and write
> >a completely proprietary piece of software, with license fees and
> >per-seat restrictions and everything? i might decide, for better
> >or worse, to open source that product, and yet it would still be
> >proprietary and non-free.
>
> Wrong. That is not open source. That is "source code
> available", like pine or qmail or something else. The definition
> of "open source" is software under a license that is approved by
> OSI, of which the appropriate licenses are located at:
>
> http://www.opensource.org
ok, i see the distinction. i didn't realize that you were using
the phrase "open source" in that official capacity.
rday
More information about the test
mailing list