> I realize that you are frustrated with the terms and their definitions. > However, if someone is well-versed in the GPL philosophy and rhetoric, > it is understood what is meant when I say free and when I say open. > I don't see any other good way to discuss it. Certainly in the BSD > camp we don't think that the GPL is "free." Yes, it is a legal > monstrosity and it limits your rights. I just can't have a coherent > conversation with someone all the while inserting that disclaimer > every damn time I use a word. However, I have to agree, Stallman's > arguments are rhetorical, they do contain equivocations on words > like free.
I don't care what he wants to call freedom. I know what the dictionary says. I don't care how often GPL people repeat his nonsense; it still isn't so. Do what you can and always point this out to the GPL folk until they start using the right definitions for their license. So lets repeat it, GPL software is GRATIS.
