From owner-freebsd-chat Sat Apr 6 3:50:47 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from postfix1-2.free.fr (postfix1-2.free.fr [213.228.0.130]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2F2637B41E for ; Sat, 6 Apr 2002 03:50:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from bluerondo.a.la.turk (nas-cbv-4-62-147-140-160.dial.proxad.net [62.147.140.160]) by postfix1-2.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 221ECAAFEE for ; Sat, 6 Apr 2002 13:50:28 +0200 (CEST) Received: (qmail 2662 invoked by uid 1001); 6 Apr 2002 11:50:21 -0000 Date: Sat, 6 Apr 2002 13:50:21 +0200 From: Rahul Siddharthan To: Terry Lambert Cc: Greg Pavelcak , freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Use/Utilize Message-ID: <20020406115021.GB2576@lpt.ens.fr> Mail-Followup-To: Terry Lambert , Greg Pavelcak , freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG References: <20020405183857.GA58446@oitunix.oit.umass.edu> <20020405231950.B63981@lpt.ens.fr> <3CAE3C62.4012DA04@mindspring.com> <20020406064529.GB1426@lpt.ens.fr> <3CAE9E85.BDEDB76C@mindspring.com> <20020406083409.GB1901@lpt.ens.fr> <3CAEDC9E.E4A5C02B@mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3CAEDC9E.E4A5C02B@mindspring.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.27i X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 4.5-STABLE i386 Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Terry Lambert said on Apr 6, 2002 at 03:31:42: > OK. Say I agree with your definition, and "use is use". > > That means that if I'm permitted to "use" the binary, as in, > I can contact a web services platform running the binary, > and for which I am never in physical possession of the binary, > then the same restrictions for that "use" apply to my "use" > of the source code to prepare derivative works, which I then > provide only in binary form. Right? This is, I believe, a grey area -- when the GPL v2 was written this situation didn't exist. Stallman was rumoured to be addressing the question in a GPL v3 but I don't know what became of it. I very much doubt the ambiguity here is deliberate. > > > Surely, you must agree that the use of the word "free" is a > > > redefinition, right? > > > > No, but I agree it's ambiguous, and misleading, and probably > > deliberately so. > > Ah. There. Thank you. We agree to the deliberately > misleading use of language in the license, even if you > think it's limited to "free" in "libre" vs. "gratis" ("free" > implies "gratis"; the correct Englis word for "libre" is > "liberated"). No; I believe that the term "free software" was chosen more for "resonance" reasons than for accuracy and easy comprehension; but the GPL, and the GNU manifesto, and all Stallman's writings, explain in pitiless detail what he really means. As far as the GPL is concerned there is no ambiguity, because it defines the meaning carefully. (Which, again, is a subset of the dictionary meaning, not a redefinition.) - Rahul To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message