Subject: Re: Examples needed against Soft Patents
From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen@xemacs.org>
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 14:45:49 +0900

>>>>> "Russell" == Russell McOrmond <russell@flora.ca> writes:

    Russell>   It is not sufficient to be in an FSF/OSI approved
    Russell> license to be FLOSS.  The software must meet the Free
    Russell> Software definition from the FSF and the Open Source
    Russell> Definition from the OSI.  Something can be in a OSI/FSF
    Russell> approved license and still not be FLOSS.

Ah, OK.

The term "free software" is kind of specious, though.  The software
just is; "freedom" is all about licensing (or the lack of need for a
license).  So really you need to talk about a "free copy of a work of
software".



-- 
Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences     http://turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp
University of Tsukuba                    Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN
               Ask not how you can "do" free software business;
              ask what your business can "do for" free software.