On Mon, Feb 20, 2006 at 06:28:00PM -0500, Lee Revell wrote: > On Tue, 2006-02-21 at 09:57 +1100, Ryan Heise wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 20, 2006 at 05:49:49PM -0500, Lee Revell wrote: > > > I hope you understand that there could be no "free software" without > > > copyright. > > > > Source code in the public domain is free software without copyright. > > That's free as in beer, not as in speech. "Free software" in the Linux > world generally refers to the latter. > > Lee Free software must satisfy 4 kinds of freedom: (from http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html) 1. The freedom to run the program, for any purpose (freedom 0). 2. The freedom to study how the program works, and adapt it to your needs (freedom 1). Access to the source code is a precondition for this. 3. The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor (freedom 2). 4. The freedom to improve the program, and release your improvements to the public, so that the whole community benefits (freedom 3). Access to the source code is a precondition for this. Source code licensed under the GPL is one example of free software. Source code released into the public domain is another (it satisfies all 4 of the above criteria). The GPL goes beyond the normal requirements of free software by also requiring derivative works to be free. But this in itself is not a fundamental requirement of free software. Software released into the public domain without source code is not free software, since access to the source code is needed to support (4). However, if the source code is released into the public domain, then it is free software. In other words, your original statement would have been correct had it referred specifically to the GPL, and not generally to free software. (i.e. free software can, and does, exist without copyright, but copyleft software could not exist without copyright) Ryan
