Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Free Software CD for Windows?

[Gustavo C. M.]

See "Network Services Aren't Free or Nonfree; They Raise Other Issues":
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/network-services-arent-free-or-nonfree.html

"For programs, we make a distinction between free and nonfree
(proprietary). More precisely, this distinction applies to a program
that you have a copy of: either you [have the four freedoms for your
copy][1] or you don't.
[1] https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html

An activity (such as a service) doesn't exist in the form of copies, so
it's not possible to have a copy or to make copies. As a result, the
four freedoms that define free software don't make sense for services."

-------

In what concerns to patents turning its objects nonfree, I don't know if
the law, let's say, automatically forbids everyone but the author to use
them (its confusing to me to "find a pattern" here because of the lack
of distinctions between software and other "patenteable" things); but,
AFAIK, it is perfectly possible to patent something and give to people
any permissions over it. (I've seen this, but I can't remember where.)

I didn't read all of this yet:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/software-patents.html

Em Dom, 2012-12-02 às 19:46 +0200, Alexey Eromenko escreveu:
> On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 7:13 PM, Gustavo C. M. <gustavo_cm@lavabit.com> wrote:
> > freedoms[1]: (0) to run the program, (1) to study and change the program
> > in source code form, (2) to redistribute exact copies, and (3) to
> > distribute modified versions."
> 
> Under this definition Cloud software and patented codecs become
> non-free, right ?
>

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part