RE: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Abraham Marín Pérez [mailto:tecnic5@××××××××.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2007 7:43 PM
> To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
> Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??
>
>
> burlingk@×××××××××.mil escribió:
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: lunarcrisis@×××××.com [mailto:lunarcrisis@×××××.com] On
> >> Behalf Of Henk Boom
> >> Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2007 11:08 AM
> >> To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
> >> Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??
  
> >
> > The four freedoms:
> > Freedom 0: The freedom to run a program for any purpose.
> Freedom 1: To
> > study the way a program works, and adapt it to your needs.
> Freedom 2:
> > To redistribute copies so that you can help your neighbors.
> Freedom 3:
> > Improve the program, and release your improvements to
> >            the public, so that the whole community benefits.
> > For freedom 1 and 3 to work, the code must be open.
> >
> > Freedom 1 is just as important as the other three. Freedom one is
> > almost eliminated in GPLv3.  Freedom One is the freedom that was
> > most whole heartedly expressed in the original manifesto.
> >
> > Freedom 3 is the one that GPLv3 is making most important
> now. It does
> > so to the detriment of the other three.
> >
> >
>
> I'm not very into licenses and hence my question may seem evident (or
> even stupid) but still... does not Freedom 3 imply Freedom 1? I mean,
> how can you improve a program without being able to study it?

:)
The freedoms were listed before any license was written.
They were the credo that the GNU foundation was founded upon.
They were still the credo when the name became the Free Software Foundation.
^_^

Now the direction of the organization has apparently changed.
They are more interested in slowing down the competition than
helping the community.  When they first started, the competition
was still thought of as a part of the community.  :/

I worry.



-- 
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list