On 6/10/10, Tzafrir Cohen <tzaf...@cohens.org.il> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 02:04:29PM +0300, Oleg Goldshmidt wrote: > >> Is there an "official" term for software that comes with source code >> but does not allow one to modify or distribute it (modified or not)? >> [This was the original question that fueled my curiosity.] > > By giving up any of those freedoms, it means you give up on using free > software.
I know. The terms I am asking about will most definitely not classified as either free or open source SW. The subject of my friend's email to me was "not open source software" ;-). >> Are there licenses that provide the code but do not allow (even >> private) modifications? > > http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/ > http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ Yes, but both allow distribution, so they didn't fit because of that. > Sure. What you want is certainly not close to being free software. You > need not bother looking there. I did not look specifically for free/open source. I looked for license comparison lists hoping to find examples (that would not be FOSS). Finally, I did mark the post OT, I posted the question here because this is a place where there are people very well versed in the subject. -- Oleg Goldshmidt | o...@goldshmidt.org _______________________________________________ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
