Quoting Richard Fontana (rfont...@redhat.com): > Yes. I agree with you that 'public domain' is a misnomer (but no more > than, say, the use of 'proprietary' to mean 'not free-as-in-freedom > software').
FWIW, I feel the latter has domain-specific meaning, here; i.e., that 'proprietary' functions legitimately as a term of art within discussion of software. Yes, that's not what 'proprietary' means elsewhere (i.e., the qualtiy of being owned). However, meanings have contexts.[1] > Close enough, but I wouldn't want you to think Red Hat is just > concerned about Red Hat. Truth, and a point well worth making. [1] I'd rather be pissed in London than in San Francisco. _______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@opensource.org http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
