• To: <xml-dev@l...>,"K. Ari Krupnikov" <ari@c...>
• Subject: Re: ISO turns evil?
• From: "Bob Foster" <bob@o...>
• Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 23:36:08 -0500
• References: <15725CF6AFE2F34DB8A5B4770B7334EE03F9ECA1@h...><200309221515.QAA04875@p...><3F6F2920.8020608@a...> <86ad8wjjzg.fsf@f...>

From: "K. Ari Krupnikov" <ari@c...>
> Rick Jelliffe <ricko@a...> writes:
>
> > (Remember, non-commercial use is not in question
> > here, so Free software developers are immune to problems here.)
>
> "Free software" and "commercial software" are completely orthogonal
> categories. Most software, Free, open source or proprietary, is
> written with profit in mind. Red Hat sell commercial Free
> software. "Free" refers to what customers are free to do with it, not
> how much they pay. See [1] for an in-depth explanation and examples.
> [1] http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/categories.html#commercialSoftware

Double-plus-bad. Despite the efforts of the Ministry of Information, "free"
still retains the meaning "no charge", among several others that have
nothing at all to do with permission to use, copy or distribute.

Bob Foster

• Follow-Ups:
  • OCLC turns evil (was ISO turns evil?)
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
  • Re: ISO turns evil?
    • From: "Bob Foster" <bob@o...>
  • [OT] ISO politics and the English language (was: ISO turns evil?)
    • From: ari@c... (K. Ari Krupnikov)

• References:
  • RE: ISO turns evil?
    • From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
  • Re: ISO turns evil?
    • From: David Carlisle <davidc@n...>
  • Re: ISO turns evil?
    • From: Rick Jelliffe <ricko@a...>
  • Re: ISO turns evil?
    • From: ari@c... (K. Ari Krupnikov)

• Prev by Date: XQX update - Version 1.006-Beta
• Next by Date: [OT] ISO politics and the English language (was: ISO turns evil?)
• Previous by thread: Re: ISO turns evil?
• Next by thread: [OT] ISO politics and the English language (was: ISO turns evil?)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread