Subject: Re: OpenSources "opensourced"
From: "Karsten M. Self" <kmsellf@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 20:23:17 -0700

Salon now reports O'Reilly has admitted its goof, and now describes the
work as "freely available".  Story: 
(http://www.salonmagazine.com/tech/log/1999/05/21/oreilly/index.html).

FWIW, one of Bruce Peren's comments on leaving OSI was conflicts with
ORA WRT the OSS certification mark (I'd throw in a few more TLAs, but
none come to mind...).

John Gilmore wrote:
> 
> > A key part of the success of Open Source depends on the
> > easy dissemination of information over the Internet, so making it
> > possible for people to freely redistribute these essays will help to
> > spread the good word.  Still, unlike computer source code, you don't
> > want people changing the primary source material, so the license allows
> > redistribution only without modification."
> 
> Open Source has nothing to do with making frozen and unmodifiable
> images available over the Internet.
> 
> There sure are a lot of people trying to claim they are "Open Source"
> while reserving all sorts of important rights to themselves alone.
> 
>         John

-- 
Karsten M. Self (kmself@ix.netcom.com)

    What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand?
    Welchen Teil von "Gestalt" verstehen Sie nicht?

  Web: http://www.netcom.com/~kmself/
  SAS for Linux: http://www.netcom.com/~kmself/SAS/SAS4Linux.html