> 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.
I'm sorry, but calling a spade a heart doesn't make it a heart. The term
Open Source has a widespread and very specific definition, and that
defintion is more extensive than just a requirement for the distribution of
source code along with executable code.
> Open source is a perfectly viable commercial business model.
Well of course it is. Red Hat makes a lot of money selling you something
that you have every right in the world to obtain without charge. The
additional service they provide and the simplicity of being able to buy
shrink-wrapped software with written documentation is sufficient to deliver
a value proposition to customers. But that doesn't mean I can't image the
Red Hat Liniux CD and give copies away for free.
Ryan
