> I sometimes refer to free software as to "software under a free > license". If you specify that the license (and not the software) is > free, it might help people to think in the right direction.
It's also possible to having nonfree software under a free license, e.g. by tivoization, so the user cannot install a modified version. (Some packages removed from Parabola are freely licensed while having problems like requiring a nonfree compiler to build or using libraries with incompatible licenses.) Calling free software "software which respects user's freedom" might avoid this confusion, but like with any freedom it needs educating users that they could have such freedom.
pgpBpmFSe5Zko.pgp
Description: PGP signature
