Hallo, iriXx hat gesagt: // iriXx wrote: > > > Guy Daniel CLOTILDE wrote: > > >Daniel James wrote / a ?crit: > > > >>In the case of music, if someone wanted to distribute a CC'd licenced > >>piece commercially, paying the artist a fair cut, then all they'd > >>have to do is contact the artist in the usual way and work out a > >>deal. What's wrong with that? > > > > > >stepping inside... There's nothing wrong, but if it costs something > >(again, nothing wrong) then it's not... free. I think that's what Frank > >was pointing out. > > RMS would disagree. No. The "it" in "it is not free" here means the right to distribute something (also commercially), and if this costs something, "it" is not free in the RMS sense. ciao -- Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org__
