Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2002 14:49:03 -0500 From: "Karl O . Pinc" <kop@meme.com> To: gnu@gnu.org, osi@opensource.org, freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG, netbsd-advocacy@netbsd.org Subject: Software License Sound Bites, Version 0.1 Message-ID: <20020717144903.S27553@mofo.meme.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In an effort to combat the general confusion surrounding the terms Free Software and Open Source, I have attempted to write some sound bites to define, contrast, and comment on the terms. I believe I've got the definitions for each term down to two sentences. The entire document is currently 291 words (sans title and lawyerosity.) Success in this endeavor could go a long way toward combating the general mis-information being spread. If nothing else it would provide a simple way to point out errors to the mainstream press. There is no catch-phrase for "BSD style license", but would like my text to satisfy those who advocate this type of license as well. I believe the best way to serve everyone's interests is to provide clear and accurate explanations of the various "open" licenses. (The increasing popularity of Free Software and Open Source software, has resulted in increased public interest and a corresponding tendency in proprietary software vendors to either align themselves with or co-opt these movements. The resultant surge in press coverage and overall conversation seems to have increased rather than decreased the general confusion surrounding the meaning of the terms Free Software and Open Source, or at least has brought the scope of the misunderstandings to my attention.) I'm looking for corrections, omissions, blessings, curses or any other comments you may have. I'd be indebted to anyone who knows their grammar and punctuation for corrections and comments. I covet edits which further reduce the size of the text. Regards the Open Source sound bite: The "by anyone for any purpose" would seem to express the spirit of the "no discrimination" clauses of the definition, sections 5, 6, 8, and 9. Section 1 is covered by "for sale or for fee, without payment of royalties." Sections 2 and 3 are covered by "read and improved ... by anyone who has a working copy". This only leaves sections 4 and 7, which to my mind simply describe technical details. Thanks for your help. Karl <kop@meme.com> ----------------------------------------------------------------- Software License Sound Bites Version 0.1 Karl O. Pinc <kop@meme.com> President, The Meme Factory, Inc. http://www.meme.com Copyright (c) 2002, Karl O. Pinc Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.1 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant Sections, with no Front-Cover Texts, and with no Back-Cover Texts. A copy of the license is available at "http://www.gnu.org/licenses/fdl.txt". Free Software can be used, improved, and given away or sold, by anyone who has legally obtained a working copy of the software. Just two, optional, restrictions on the use of the software are permitted: should the software be defective, the authors cannot be sued; in turn, the rights of use, alteration, and re-distribution must continue to be passed onward to those who have legally obtained subsequent improvements. Free Software subject to the second of these optional restrictions is said to be copylefted. The GNU GPL is the original Free Software copyleft license. Open Source software is that which can be used, read, and improved, for any purpose, by anyone who has legally obtained a working copy of the software; improvements may be re-distributed, either for sale or for free, without payment of royalties. Other restrictions compatible with these criteria may exist. As the neither of the two restrictions allowed by the Free Software definition violate the Open Source criteria, Free Software is one variety of Open Source software. As the Open Source definition allows other restrictions to be placed on the use, distribution, and modification of the software, all Open Source software is not Free Software. Users of Free Software who understand the Free Software definition and know whether their software is copylefted can be confident they know their rights and obligations. Users of Open Source software who understand the Open source definition can be confident they have certain rights. Users of any kind of non-Free Software must examine the terms of their software license(s) to discover what obligations they have to the copyright holder and what restrictions the license may place on their activities. For more information see The Free Software Definition (http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html) and The Open Source Definition (http://www.opensource.org/docs/definition.php). To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020717144903.S27553>