[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Onkar Shinde wrote: >> On 3/11/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> Hi >>> >>> This is a follow up on the previous posts on piracy >>> >>> there is a persistent issue of Ubuntu not being totally open source and >>> that it includes components (codecs etc ) that are propreitory and that >>> basically go against the GNU/Linux core FLOSS philosophy >>> >>> comments !!! >> Wrong analogy. > > yep true > > Just that while the discussions on the ebook were on it struck me that > this was one question i had been wantin to ask - to clarify > >> The ebook was published by someone (or some company) >> and there is no mention about it being freely redistributable. >> FOSS is about sharing but not something which is not owned by you or >> when you don't have license for sharing. > > FOSS yes but the question still is about the proprietory stuff - the > difference i guess is that a. the proprietory drivers, etc are not > licensed as open source - even if they are freely distributable > > [whereas in the case of the book it is not freely distributable (and nor > is it open source)] > Yup, you got it right this time. :) Just that in the case of proprietary h/w driver stuff u only need them if you 'purchase' the hardware. So here comes the difference between the vendors which support Linux(with proprietary drivers) and those which support Open Source.
rgrds Jasbir -- ubuntu-in mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-in
