Hallo, Daniel James hat gesagt: // Daniel James wrote: > > > Ah - but you're using the 'free beer' sense in 'free > > > distribution'. > > > > What makes you think that? > > Because you said "If the right is bound to giving money to the > creator it is not a free good". Yes, but I did talk about the "right", the right to speak freely, so to say. A good is not a free (as in "libre", liberated, GNUish) good, if distribution is only allowed when paying somebody. If one would only be allowed to distribute Linux, if one did pay Linus Thorwalds for every copy, then Linux would not only fail to be "free" as in beer, it also would not be free as in "libre". The distribution must be allowed without any charges, as soon as I have the good. That's a central point in all libre software. ciao -- Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org__
