At 04:32 PM 1/3/01 -0800, Ryan S. Dancey wrote:
>"Shareware" requires a payment to be made to the author.  Open Source
>requires the the source be freely redistributable.  That's mutually
>exclusive.

No, it most definitely is NOT.  You're concentrating solely on the 
Debian/GNU definition of Open Source, which was the first, but is no longer 
the only open source license out there by a long shot.
Open source, in its most basic form, simply requires that the source code 
be distributed any time the program is distributed.  It does not allow you 
to freely distribute the source code, it only stipulates that you _must_ 
distribute it when you distribute the software by any method allowed to 
you.  It's restrictive, not permissive.  Open source is a perfectly viable 
commercial business model.

-Damian


Reply via email to