Re: Open source - Free software

[David Kastrup]

"Alfred M. Szmidt" <ams@gnu.org> writes:

>    > Since freeware by definition is software which is distributed
>    > gratis, it cannot be commercial.
>
>    Wrong: this would only be the case if freeware by definition would
>    be software which _has_ to be distributed gratis, not just software
>    which happens to be available distributed gratis.
>
>    Just because software is distributed gratis does not mean it can't
>    subsequently (or in parallel) be distributed commercially.
>
> Freeware by definition is software which is distributed without fee,
> so it cannot by definition be distributed commercially.  Maybe you
> disagree with this, but it does not make it wrong.  You really should
> learn to use better words to explain what you actually mean.

If only the alliance of Alfred and Alexander allege not getting my
meaning and all others do, that's good enough for me.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum