From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,LOTS_OF_MONEY, TO_NO_BRKTS_FROM_MSSP autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,58988230753075de X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-07-31 09:34:17 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!newsfeed.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!feed.textport.net!newsranger.com!www.newsranger.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada From: Ted Dennison References: <87wv4r1uy5.fsf@deneb.enyo.de> <+uc0vOZmzK9b@eisner.encompasserve.org> <5ee5b646.0107291409.6538ad64@posting.google.com> <4ajzJ$TMn9o+@eisner.encompasserve.org> <5PA97.12687$ar1.39620@www.newsranger.com> Subject: Re: In praise of Ada Freeware Message-ID: <86B97.12723$ar1.39955@www.newsranger.com> X-Abuse-Info: When contacting newsranger.com regarding abuse please X-Abuse-Info: forward the entire news article including headers or X-Abuse-Info: else we will not be able to process your request X-Complaints-To: abuse@newsranger.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2001 12:34:12 EDT Organization: http://www.newsranger.com Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2001 16:34:12 GMT Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:10879 Date: 2001-07-31T16:34:12+00:00 List-Id: In article <5PA97.12687$ar1.39620@www.newsranger.com>, Ted Dennison says... >Just to further clarify, do you get the right to modify and redistribute the >sources with this "VMS Freeware"? In the larger world you would generally not >have either right with Freeware (as the sources aren't given to you in the first To partially answer my own question, the example Larry quoted: >> http://www.openvms.compaq.com/freeware/FREEWARE40/TESTDEV/SRC/ If you go up a directory and look at the readme file, it explicitly gives permission for distributing *verbatim* copies at no charge. But reserves all other rights. The author probably intended to also allow the rights of running it and of modification (although he did not do so). But it is certianly not permitted to modify it and distribute the result, and that seems the clear intent. That's probably fine for the small utility which this is. But for any large program that must change to thrive, such a provision would fatally tie it to the interest and lifetime of the original author. You have only to look at the state of the c.l.a. FAQ at AdaHome, which has very similar license terms, to see what that would mean in practice. I'm being a bit unfair here, as this is but a single example. But if you mean "Freeware" to include terms such as these, I would submit that your argument would be better served by something at least a *little* more free. Again, I think you *should* be shooting for (if you weren't already), "permissively licensed" Free Software. --- T.E.D. homepage - http://www.telepath.com/dennison/Ted/TED.html home email - mailto:dennison@telepath.com