▲ | tsimionescu 6 days ago | |
That definition, and Richard Stallman himself, completely agree with me. A BSD license also guarantees "that the users have the freedom to run, copy, distribute, study, change and improve the software". Here is Stallman spelling it out explicitly: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/bsd.en.html > The two major categories of free software license are copyleft and non-copyleft. Copyleft licenses such as the GNU GPL insist that modified versions of the program must be free software as well. Non-copyleft licenses do not insist on this. We recommend copyleft, because it protects freedom for all users, but non-copylefted software can still be free software, and useful to the free software community. > There are many variants of simple non-copyleft free software licenses, such as the Expat license, FreeBSD license, X10 license, the X11 license, and the two BSD (Berkeley Software Distribution) licenses. So, I stand by my assertion. You are completely wrong in saying that only copy left licenses are free/libre software, even according to Richard Stallman himself. | ||
▲ | pabs3 6 days ago | parent [-] | |
The BSD license does not offer the same software freedom guarantees as copyleft licenses though, since downstreams can elect to not release the source code. You are right otherwise though. |