Free World Licence.

Ross N. Williams ross at
Tue Oct 19 01:08:16 UTC 1999

At 12:26 AM -0700 18/10/99, Bruce Perens wrote:
>From: "Ross N. Williams" <ross at>
>> Free     : GNU/Linux (often called just "Linux"
>A license discussion! What a breath of fresh air compared to what we've
>been seeing lately on the license-discuss list :-)
>1. There are lots of Linux systems that contain non-free components. That's
>why we make this determination at the program level rather than the system

Aren't those sort of non-free components typically above the OS level?
My definition requires that only the parts that my program needs to
run be free.

>2. Restricting to "free platforms" as you define them would be contrary
>to section #9 of the Open Source Definition:
>	9. License Must Not Contaminate Other Software.
>	The license must not place restrictions on other software that
>	is distributed along with the licensed software. For example,
>	the license must not insist that all other programs distributed
>	on the same medium must be open-source software.

This isn't true. The licence has a GNU-like clause as follows:

   AGGREGATION: Mere aggregation of another work not based on
   the Module with the Module (or with a work based on the
   Module) on a volume of a storage or distribution medium does
   not bring the other work under the scope of this Licence.


Dr Ross N. Williams (ross at, +61 8 8232-6262 (fax-6264).
Director, Rocksoft Pty Ltd, Adelaide, Australia: 
Protect your files with Veracity data integrity:

More information about the License-discuss mailing list