On Tue, 2005-01-11 at 15:56, Don Grodecki wrote:
> I am having arguments with my colleagues regarding some of the terms used 
> with respect to FOSS. Can anyone help me to understand what some of these 
> terms really mean?
> 
> Open
A term of art I think.

> Open Source Software
I would take the definition of the OSF, who trademarked it in the US at
least:-
http://www.opensource.org/docs/definition.php
"Open source doesn't just mean access to the source code. The
distribution terms of open-source software must comply with the
following criteria: ..."

I'd expect anyone asking those questions to also find useful an answer
to the question of what is Logiciel Libre/Free[1] Software
The premier reference has to be 
www.fsf.org

([1] as in speech not as in beer)

> Software in the Public Domain
> Software licensed to the Public Domain
I think the latter of those two is impossible/a paradox.

> Ownership
Is theft.[2]

[2] Ah, but from whom?
    (and it is a quote, not an assertion)

> Copyright
Subsists automatically.  CopyLeft OTOH is a constituent of Free (Libre)
Software but may not be of all Open Source Software ... the BSD Licence
for instance does not preserve and enforce CopyLeft.

> License for Use
The owner of the copyright may give you licence for use.
If he has put it out under copyleft, he has given such licence to you,
and your aunts and cousins and anyone else, without trooubling you to
ask or him to count.  This saves a certain amount of effort when you are
trying to disseminate something.


> License for Derivation
An essential component of the Free Software licences such as the GPL,
and the Open Source licences.  You can alter it, with or without telling
anyone.  (If it is FLOSS you must distribute your source code
alterations if you distribute the compiled executable, but crucially in
FUD-busting terms you need not distribute it, and therefore need not
distribute the alterations at all to anyone.
(The real driver of FLOSS spreading is that it is usually rather silly
to give yourself extra recurrent work but _not_ redistributing and
having aggregated your changes with the base version, not the Gates
Commie creed.)

> License for Re-Distribution
An essential component of the Free Software licences such as the GPL,
and the Open Source licences.  


IANAL.

-- 
Adrian Midgley            FLOSS  regularly

Reply via email to