On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 10:28:49PM -0600, Mike Goodspeed wrote: > Ross Day wrote: > >Which definition is that? Mr. Stallman would claim that FireFox isn't > >fully "free", yet I'm sure it's on the FSCK CD. > > That's right, Ross. The build we supply isn't Free. It's encumbered by > trademark problems. Really, it's open source with the option of being > free again in another life. We can build our own copy of the software > and distribute along with these terms:
I did a quick Google for Stallman and Firefox and I couldn't find an opinion like that. However, trademarks are not usually construed as nullifying the 4 freedoms of free software. It doesn't inhibit my freedom to be asked to abstain from a trademarked term when creating derivative works. The Mozilla Trademark Policy FAQ (http://www.mozilla.org/foundation/trademarks/faq.html) even notes that their products are free software and links to the definition at gnu.org. So to answer the initial question: I suppose ultimately, since I collect and build the FreeCD image, I have to be convinced that a program is free enough and good enough to be included. So "my definition" is the one that matters. Don -- Don Bindner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ----------------------------------------------------------------- To get off this list, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with Subject: unsubscribe -----------------------------------------------------------------
