summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/scrap1_1.html
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat (limited to 'talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/scrap1_1.html')
-rw-r--r--talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/scrap1_1.html369
1 files changed, 369 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/scrap1_1.html b/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/scrap1_1.html
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..90c0203
--- /dev/null
+++ b/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/scrap1_1.html
@@ -0,0 +1,369 @@
+<!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected Essays of Richard M. Stallman.
+
+Free Software Foundation
+
+51 Franklin Street, Fifth Floor
+
+Boston, MA 02110-1335
+Copyright C 2002, 2010 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
+Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire book are permitted
+worldwide, without royalty, in any medium, provided this notice is
+preserved. Permission is granted to copy and distribute translations
+of this book from the original English into another language provided
+the translation has been approved by the Free Software Foundation and
+the copyright notice and this permission notice are preserved on all
+copies.
+
+ISBN 978-0-9831592-0-9
+Cover design by Rob Myers.
+
+Cover photograph by Peter Hinely.
+ -->
+
+
+ <a name="The-Free-Software-Definition">
+ </a>
+ <h1 class="chapter">
+ 1. The Free Software Definition
+ </h1>
+ <a name="index-free-software-_0028see-also-free-software_002c-four-freedoms_002c-citizen-values_002c-selling_002c-and-software_0029">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ We maintain this free software definition to show clearly what must be
+true about a particular software program for it to be considered free
+software. From time to time we revise this definition to clarify it.
+If you would like to review the changes we’ve made, please see the
+History section, following the definition, at
+ <a href="http://gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html">
+ http://gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html
+ </a>
+ .
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ “Free software” is a matter of liberty, not price. To understand
+the concept, you should think of “free” as in “free speech,”
+not as in “free beer.”
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-free-software_002c-four-freedoms">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-four-freedoms">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Free software is a matter of the users’ freedom to run, copy, distribute,
+study, change and improve the software. More precisely, it means that the
+program’s users have the four essential freedoms:
+ </p>
+ <ul>
+ <li>
+ The freedom to run the program, for any purpose (freedom 0).
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ The freedom to study how the program works, and change it to make it
+do what you wish (freedom 1). Access to the source code is a
+precondition for this.
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor
+(freedom 2).
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ The freedom to distribute copies of your modified versions to others
+(freedom 3). By doing this you can give the whole community a chance
+to benefit from your changes. Access to the source code is a
+precondition for this.
+ </li>
+ </ul>
+ <p>
+ A program is free software if users have all of these freedoms. Thus,
+you should be free to redistribute copies, either with or without
+modifications, either gratis or charging a fee for distribution, to
+anyone anywhere. Being free to do these things means (among other
+things) that you do not have to ask or pay for permission to do so.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ You should also have the freedom to make modifications and use them
+privately in your own work or play, without even mentioning that they
+exist. If you do publish your changes, you should not be required to
+notify anyone in particular, or in any particular way.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The freedom to run the program means the freedom for any kind of
+person or organization to use it on any kind of computer system, for
+any kind of overall job and purpose, without being required to
+communicate about it with the developer or any other specific
+entity. In this freedom, it is the
+ <em>
+ user’s
+ </em>
+ purpose that matters,
+not the
+ <em>
+ developer’s
+ </em>
+ purpose; you as a user are free to run the
+program for your purposes, and if you distribute it to someone else,
+she is then free to run it for her purposes, but you are not entitled
+to impose your purposes on her.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The freedom to redistribute copies must include binary or executable
+forms of the program, as well as source code, for both modified and
+unmodified versions. (Distributing programs in runnable form is necessary
+for conveniently installable free operating systems.) It is OK if there
+is no way to produce a binary or executable form for a certain program
+(since some languages don’t support that feature), but you must have the
+freedom to redistribute such forms should you find or develop a way to
+make them.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ In order for freedoms 1 and 3 (the freedom to make changes
+and the freedom to publish improved versions) to be meaningful, you
+must have access to the source code of the program. Therefore,
+accessibility of source code is a necessary condition for free
+software. Obfuscated “source code” is not real source code and does
+not count as source code.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Freedom 1 includes the freedom to use your changed version in
+place of the original. If the program is delivered in a product
+designed to run someone else’s modified versions but refuse to run
+yours—a practice known as
+ <a name="index-tivoization">
+ </a>
+ “tivoization” or (in its practitioners’
+perverse terminology) as
+ <a name="index-secure-boot-_0028see-also-tivoization_0029">
+ </a>
+ “secure boot”—freedom 1 becomes a theoretical fiction rather
+than a practical freedom. This is not sufficient. In other words,
+these binaries are not free software even if the source code they are
+compiled from is free.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ One important way to modify a program is by merging in available free
+subroutines and modules.
+ <a name="index-copyright-_0028see-also-both-copyleft-and-DMCA_0029">
+ </a>
+ If the program’s license says that you cannot merge in a suitably
+licensed existing module—for instance, if it requires you to be the
+copyright holder of any code you add—then the license is too
+restrictive to qualify as free.
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-copyleft-_0028see-also-copyright_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Freedom 3 includes the freedom to release your modified versions
+as free software. A free license may also permit other ways of
+releasing them; in other words, it does not have to be a copyleft
+license. However, a license that requires modified versions to be
+nonfree does not qualify as a free license.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ In order for these freedoms to be real, they must be permanent and
+irrevocable as long as you do nothing wrong; if the developer of the
+software has the power to revoke the license, or retroactively change
+its terms, without your doing anything wrong to give cause, the
+software is not free.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ However, certain kinds of rules about the manner of distributing free
+software are acceptable, when they don’t conflict with the central
+freedoms. For example, copyleft (very simply stated) is the rule that
+when redistributing the program, you cannot add restrictions to deny
+other people the central freedoms. This rule does not conflict with
+the central freedoms; rather it protects them.
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-commercial-use-and-development">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-free-software_002c-to-be-distinguished-from-noncommercial-software">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ “Free software” does not mean “noncommercial.” A free program must
+be available for commercial use, commercial development, and
+commercial distribution. Commercial development of free software is no
+longer unusual; such free commercial software is very important. You
+may have paid money to get copies of free software, or you may have
+obtained copies at no charge. But regardless of how you got your
+copies, you always have the freedom to copy and change the software,
+even to sell copies.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Whether a change constitutes an improvement is a subjective matter.
+If your modifications are limited, in substance, to changes that
+someone else considers an improvement, that is not freedom.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ However, rules about how to package a modified version are acceptable,
+if they don’t substantively limit your freedom to release modified
+versions, or your freedom to make and use modified versions privately.
+Thus, it is acceptable for the license to require that you change the
+name of the modified version, remove a logo, or identify your
+modifications as yours. As long as these requirements are not so
+burdensome that they effectively hamper you from releasing your
+changes, they are acceptable; you’re already making other changes to
+the program, so you won’t have trouble making a few more.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Rules that “if you make your version available in this way, you must
+make it available in that way also” can be acceptable too, on the
+same condition. An example of such an acceptable rule is one saying
+that if you have distributed a modified version and a previous
+developer asks for a copy of it, you must send one. (Note that such a
+rule still leaves you the choice of whether to distribute your version
+at all.) Rules that require release of source code to the users for
+versions that you put into public use are also acceptable.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ In the GNU Project, we use copyleft to protect these freedoms legally
+for everyone. But
+ <a name="index-noncopylefted-free-software-_0028see-also-software_0029">
+ </a>
+ noncopylefted free software also exists. We believe there are
+important reasons why it is better to use copyleft, but if your
+program is noncopylefted free software, it is still basically
+ethical. (See “Categories of Free and Nonfree Software”
+(p. @refx{Categories-pg}{) for a description of how “free software,”
+“copylefted software” and other categories of software relate to
+each other.)
+ <a name="index-copyleft-_0028see-also-copyright_0029-2">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-free-software_002c-and-export-control-regulations">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Sometimes government export control regulations and trade sanctions
+can constrain your freedom to distribute copies of programs
+internationally. Software developers do not have the power to
+eliminate or override these restrictions, but what they can and must
+do is refuse to impose them as conditions of use of the program. In
+this way, the restrictions will not affect activities and people
+outside the jurisdictions of these governments. Thus, free software
+licenses must not require obedience to any export regulations as a
+condition of any of the essential freedoms.
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-copyright-_0028see-also-both-copyleft-and-DMCA_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Most free software licenses are based on copyright, and there are limits
+on what kinds of requirements can be imposed through copyright. If a
+copyright-based license respects freedom in the ways described above, it
+is unlikely to have some other sort of problem that we never anticipated
+(though this does happen occasionally). However, some free software
+licenses are based on contracts, and contracts can impose a much larger
+range of possible restrictions. That means there are many possible ways
+such a license could be unacceptably restrictive and nonfree.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ We can’t possibly list all the ways that might happen. If a
+contract-based license restricts the user in an unusual way that
+copyright-based licenses cannot, and which isn’t mentioned here as
+legitimate, we will have to think about it, and we will probably conclude
+it is nonfree.
+ </p>
+ <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-use-correct-terminology-_0028see-also-terminology_0029">
+ </a>
+ <a name="index-_0060_0060piracy_002c_0027_0027-erroneous-use-of-term">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ When talking about free software, it is best to avoid using terms like
+“give away” or “for free,” because those terms imply that the
+issue is about price, not freedom. Some common terms such as
+“piracy” embody opinions we hope you won’t endorse. See “Words to
+Avoid (or Use with Care)” (p. @refx{Words to Avoid-pg}{) for a discussion
+of these terms. We also have a list of proper translations of “free
+software” into various languages (p. @refx{FS Translations-pg}{).
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Finally, note that criteria such as those stated in this free software
+definition require careful thought for their interpretation. To decide
+whether a specific software license qualifies as a free software license,
+we judge it based on these criteria to determine whether it fits their
+spirit as well as the precise words. If a license includes unconscionable
+restrictions, we reject it, even if we did not anticipate the issue
+in these criteria. Sometimes a license requirement raises an issue
+that calls for extensive thought, including discussions with a lawyer,
+before we can decide if the requirement is acceptable. When we reach
+a conclusion about a new issue, we often update these criteria to make
+it easier to see why certain licenses do or don’t qualify.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ If you are interested in whether a specific license qualifies as a
+free software license, see our list of licenses, at
+ <a href="http://gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html">
+ http://gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html
+ </a>
+ . If the
+license you are concerned with is not listed there, you can ask us
+about it by sending us email at
+ <a href="mailto:licensing@gnu.org">
+ licensing@gnu.org
+ </a>
+ .
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ If you are contemplating writing a new license, please contact the
+Free Software Foundation first by writing to that address. The
+proliferation of different free software licenses means increased work
+for users in understanding the licenses; we may be able to help you
+find an existing free software license that meets your needs.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ If that isn’t possible, if you really need a new license, with our
+help you can ensure that the license really is a free software license
+and avoid various practical problems.
+ </p>
+ <a name="Beyond-Software">
+ </a>
+ <h3 class="subheading">
+ Beyond Software
+ </h3>
+ <a name="index-manuals-_0028see-also-manuals_002c-FDL_002c-and-documentation_0029">
+ </a>
+ <p>
+ Software manuals must be free, for the same reasons that software
+must be free, and because the manuals are in effect part of the
+software.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The same arguments also make sense for other kinds of works of
+practical use—that is to say, works that embody useful knowledge,
+such as educational works and reference works.
+ <a name="index-Wikipedia">
+ </a>
+ Wikipedia is the best-known example.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Any kind of work
+ <em>
+ can
+ </em>
+ be free, and the definition of free software
+has been extended to a definition of free cultural works
+ <a href="#FOOT1" name="DOCF1">
+ (1)
+ </a>
+ applicable to any kind of works.
+ <a name="index-free-software-_0028see-also-free-software_002c-four-freedoms_002c-citizen-values_002c-selling_002c-and-software_0029-1">
+ </a>
+ </p>
+ <div class="footnote">
+ <hr>
+ <h3>
+ Footnotes
+ </h3>
+ <h3>
+ <a href="#DOCF1" name="FOOT1">
+ (1)
+ </a>
+ </h3>
+ <p>
+ See
+ <a href="http://freedomdefined.org">
+ http://freedomdefined.org
+ </a>
+ .
+ </p>
+ </hr>
+ </div>
+ <hr size="2"/>
+