In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Mathieu Roy wrote: >> ... Based on this, I believe that RMS would say that a program with >> an unremovable, unmodifiable, 10,000 word "Ode to my goldfish" and >> no other restrictions would be free software, although >> inconvenient. I haven't seen anyone from Debian defend that >> position yet. > > If you want to know what rms consider as free software and what he do > not consider as free software, please take a look at <http://www.gnu.org>, > especially <http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/license-list.html> > > You do not have to guess, to "believe", what position he may defends > because it's already explicitely stated.
I've read those, of course. More relevant to these hypothetical licences is http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html , which (if read carefully) also supports my position above. However, I am not RMS, and I can't apply the algorithms he would use to judge freeness, so there is a certain amount of guessing, since I know of no softwareq distributed under this hypothetical ode-ious license. Peace, Dylan
