Re: Open source - Free software

[Al Klein]

On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 08:32:33 +0200, David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> wrote:

>Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid> writes:
>
>> On Wed, 27 Sep 2006 14:27:34 -0400, Barry Margolin
>> <barmar@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
>>
>>>Whether they should be able to is of purely academic interest.  The fact 
>>>is that they *did* do this, and this is what the phrase "free software" 
>>>now means in the industry.  You can dislike it all you want, but you 
>>>can't legitimately claim that it didn't happen, and ignoring it will 
>>>simply lead to confusion in discussions like this.
>>
>> So will ignoring the fact that "free <any product in commerce>" means
>> without charge.
>
>Like "free press"?

If "press" is a product in commerce, yes.  If someone is giving you a
printing press and not taking anything in return for it, it's a free
press.

"Press", as in "the fourth estate", isn't an item in commerce, is it?

That I have to explain this points out how ambiguous the choice of
"free software" not meaning "software for no charge" is.
-- 
It's back - http://www.webdingers.com/filelist.html