GNU GPL and Open Source Definition
Seth David Schoen
schoen at loyalty.org
Wed Apr 28 04:31:11 UTC 1999
Signal 11 writes:
> I think the intent of the GPL is to be able to charge for /distribution/.
> The source (and derived binaries) is free in every sense of the word.
> If there's a bug in the GPL that doesn't reflect those ideals, it needs
> to be fixed. E-mail rms and tell him to look into it. Unfortunately, his
> exact e-mail is not in my possession, but e-mailing gnu at gnu.org should get
> the same result.
Mr. Stallman's at rms at gnu.org, but I don't think he'd consider the ability
to sell free software for profit a bug. Before reporting a bug in the GPL,
please read carefully all the documentation at
Seth David Schoen <schoen at loyalty.org>
They said look at the light we're giving you, / And the darkness
that we're saving you from. -- Dar Williams, "The Great Unknown"
http://ishmael.geecs.org/~sigma/ (personal) http://www.loyalty.org/ (CAF)
More information about the License-discuss