/[www]/www/philosophy/free-sw.html

Diff of /www/philosophy/free-sw.html

Parent Directory | Revision Log | View Patch Patch

-revision 1.50 by johnsu01,
Fri Oct 13 16:47:36 2006 UTC
+revision 1.126 by rms,
Fri Dec 20 09:31:03 2013 UTC
 Line 1
- <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
+ <!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" -->
- <?xml-stylesheet type="text/css" href="/gnu.css"?>
+ <!-- Parent-Version: 1.75 -->
- <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
+ <title>What is free software?
-     "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
+ - GNU Project - Free Software Foundation</title>
- <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en">
+ <meta http-equiv="Keywords" content="GNU, FSF, Free Software Foundation, Linux, Emacs, GCC, Unix, Free Software, Operating System, GNU Kernel, HURD, GNU HURD, Hurd" />
- <head>
+ <meta http-equiv="Description" content="Since 1983, developing the free Unix style operating system GNU, so that computer users can have the freedom to share and improve the software they use." />
- <title>
- The Free Software Definition - GNU Project - Free Software Foundation (FSF)
- </title>
- <link rev="made" href="mailto:webmasters@gnu.org" />
- </head>
- <!-- This document is in XML and XHTML. -->
- <!-- Please ensure that your final document is -->
- <!-- consistent with W3C XHTML and CSS standards -->
- <!-- Also, see validator.w3.org -->
- <body>
- <div id="header">
-   <a href="http://www.defectivebydesign.org/join/gnu">
-     <img src="/graphics/dbd.png"
-          alt="[Join the FSF Campaign to Eliminate DRM]" />
-   </a>
- </div>
- <hr />
+ <!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/free-sw.translist" -->
+ <!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" -->
- <p><a href="#translations">Translations</a> of this page</p>
+ <h2>What is free software?</h2>
  <h3>The Free Software Definition</h3>
+ <blockquote>
+ <p>
+ The free software definition presents the criteria for whether a
+ particular software program qualifies as free software.  From time to
+ time we revise this definition, to clarify it or to resolve questions
+ about subtle issues.  See the <a href="#History">History section</a>
+ below for a list of changes that affect the definition of free
+ software.
+ </p>
+ </blockquote>
  <p>
- <a href="/graphics/philosophicalgnu.html">
+ &ldquo;Free software&rdquo; means software that respects users'
-   <img src="/graphics/philosophical-gnu-sm.jpg"
+ freedom and community.  Roughly, <b>the users have the freedom to run,
-        alt=" [image of a Philosophical Gnu] "
+ copy, distribute, study, change and improve the software</b>.
-        width="160px"
-        height="200px" />
- </a>
  </p>
  <p>
- We maintain this free software definition to show clearly what must
+ Thus, &ldquo;free software&rdquo; is a matter of liberty, not price.
- be true about a particular software program for it to be considered
+ To understand the concept, you should think of &ldquo;free&rdquo; as
- free software.
+ in &ldquo;free speech,&rdquo; not as in &ldquo;free beer&rdquo;.
  </p>
  <p>
- <q>Free software</q> is a matter of liberty, not price.  To understand
+ With these freedoms, the users (both individually and collectively)
- the concept, you should think of <q>free</q> as in <q>free speech,</q>
+ control the program and what it does for them.  When users don't
- not as in <q>free beer.</q>
+ control the program, the program controls the users.  The developer
+ controls the program, and through it exercises power over the users.
+ Therefore, a &ldquo;nonfree&rdquo; or &ldquo;proprietary&rdquo; program
+ is <a href="/philosophy/free-software-even-more-important.html"> an
+ instrument of unjust power</a>.
  </p>
  <p>
- Free software is a matter of the users' freedom to run, copy, distribute,
+ A program is free software if the program's users have the
- study, change and improve the software.  More precisely, it refers to
+ four essential freedoms:
- four kinds of freedom, for the users of the software:
  </p>
  <ul>
    <li>The freedom to run the program, for any purpose (freedom 0).</li>
-   <li>The freedom to study how the program works, and adapt it to
+   <li>The freedom to study how the program works, and change it so it
-       your needs (freedom 1). Access to the source code is a precondition
+       does your computing as you wish (freedom 1). Access to the source
-       for this.
+       code is a precondition for this.
    </li>
    <li>The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor
        (freedom 2).
    </li>
-   <li>The freedom to improve the program, and release your improvements
+   <li>The freedom to distribute copies of your modified versions
-       to the public, so that the whole community benefits (freedom 3).
+       to others (freedom 3).  By doing this you can give the whole
+       community a chance to benefit from your changes.
        Access to the source code is a precondition for this.
    </li>
  </ul>
  <p>
- A program is free software if users have all of these freedoms.  Thus,
+ A program is free software if it gives users adequately all of these
- you should be free to redistribute copies, either with or without
+ freedoms.  Otherwise, it is nonfree.  While we can distinguish various
- modifications, either gratis or charging a fee for distribution, to
+ nonfree distribution schemes in terms of how far they fall short of
+ being free, we consider them all equally unethical.</p>
+ <p>The rest of this page clarifies certain points about what makes
+ specific freedoms adequate or not.</p>
+ <p>Freedom to distribute (freedoms 2 and 3) means you are free to
+ redistribute copies, either with or without modifications, either
+ gratis or charging a fee for distribution, to
  <a href="#exportcontrol">anyone anywhere</a>.  Being free to do these
  things means (among other things) that you do not have to ask or pay
- for permission.
+ for permission to do so.
  </p>
  <p>
-Line 94 
 or organization to use it on any kind of
+Line 97 
 or organization to use it on any kind of
  overall job and purpose, without being required to communicate about it
  with the developer or any other specific entity.  In this freedom, it is
  the <em>user's</em> purpose that matters, not the <em>developer's</em>
- purpose; you as a user are free to run a program for your purposes,
+ purpose; you as a user are free to run the program for your purposes,
  and if you distribute it to someone else, she is then free to run it
  for her purposes, but you are not entitled to impose your purposes on her.
  </p>
-Line 103 
 for her purposes, but you are not entitl
+Line 106 
 for her purposes, but you are not entitl
  The freedom to redistribute copies must include binary or executable
  forms of the program, as well as source code, for both modified and
  unmodified versions.  (Distributing programs in runnable form is necessary
- for conveniently installable free operating systems.)  It is ok if there
+ for conveniently installable free operating systems.)  It is OK if there
  is no way to produce a binary or executable form for a certain program
  (since some languages don't support that feature), but you must have the
  freedom to redistribute such forms should you find or develop a way to
-Line 111 
 make them.
+Line 114 
 make them.
  </p>
  <p>
- In order for the freedoms to make changes, and to publish improved
+ In order for freedoms 1 and 3 (the freedom to make changes and the
- versions, to be meaningful, you must have access to the source code of
+ freedom to publish the changed versions) to be meaningful, you must have
- the program.  Therefore, accessibility of source code is a necessary
+ access to the source code of the program.  Therefore, accessibility of
- condition for free software.
+ source code is a necessary condition for free software.  Obfuscated
+ &ldquo;source code&rdquo; is not real source code and does not count
+ as source code.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Freedom 1 includes the freedom to use your changed version in place of
+ the original.  If the program is delivered in a product designed to
+ run someone else's modified versions but refuse to run yours &mdash; a
+ practice known as &ldquo;tivoization&rdquo; or &ldquo;lockdown&rdquo;,
+ or (in its practitioners' perverse terminology) as &ldquo;secure
+ boot&rdquo; &mdash; freedom 1 becomes a theoretical fiction rather
+ than a practical freedom.  This is not sufficient.  In other words,
+ these binaries are not free software even if the source code they are
+ compiled from is free.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ One important way to modify a program is by merging in available free
+ subroutines and modules.  If the program's license says that you
+ cannot merge in a suitably licensed existing module &mdash; for instance, if it
+ requires you to be the copyright holder of any code you add &mdash; then the
+ license is too restrictive to qualify as free.
  </p>
  <p>
- One important way to modify a program is by merging in available
+ Freedom 3 includes the freedom to release your modified versions
- free subroutines and modules.  If the program's license says that you
+ as free software.  A free license may also permit other ways of
- cannot merge in an existing module, such as if it requires you to be the
+ releasing them; in other words, it does not have to be
- copyright holder of any code you add, then the license is too restrictive
+ a <a href="/copyleft/copyleft.html">copyleft</a> license.  However, a
- to qualify as free.
+ license that requires modified versions to be nonfree does not qualify
+ as a free license.
  </p>
  <p>
- In order for these freedoms to be real, they must be irrevocable as
+ In order for these freedoms to be real, they must be permanent and
- long as you do nothing wrong; if the developer of the software has the
+ irrevocable as long as you do nothing wrong; if the developer of the
- power to revoke the license, without your doing anything to give cause,
+ software has the power to revoke the license, or retroactively add
- the software is not free.
+ restrictions to its terms, without your doing anything wrong to give
+ cause, the software is not free.
  </p>
  <p>
-Line 142 
 the central freedoms; rather it protects
+Line 169 
 the central freedoms; rather it protects
  </p>
  <p>
+ &ldquo;Free software&rdquo; does not mean &ldquo;noncommercial&rdquo;.  A free
+ program must be available for commercial use, commercial development,
+ and commercial distribution.  Commercial development of free software
+ is no longer unusual; such free commercial software is very important.
  You may have paid money to get copies of free software, or you may have
  obtained copies at no charge.  But regardless of how you got your copies,
  you always have the freedom to copy and change the software, even to
-Line 149 
 you always have the freedom to copy and
+Line 180 
 you always have the freedom to copy and
  </p>
  <p>
- <q>Free software</q> does not mean <q>non-commercial.</q>  A free
+ Whether a change constitutes an improvement is a subjective matter.
- program must be available for commercial use, commercial development,
+ If your right to modify a program is limited, in substance, to changes that
- and commercial distribution.  Commercial development of free software
+ someone else considers an improvement, that program is not free.
- is no longer unusual; such free commercial software is very important.
  </p>
  <p>
- Rules about how to package a modified version are acceptable, if they
+ However, rules about how to package a modified version are acceptable,
- don't substantively block your freedom to release modified versions, or
+ if they don't substantively limit your freedom to release modified
- your freedom to make and use modified versions privately.  Rules that <q>if
+ versions, or your freedom to make and use modified versions privately.
- you make your version available in this way, you must make it available in
+ Thus, it is acceptable for the license to require that you change the
- that way also</q> can be acceptable too, on the same condition.  (Note that
+ name of the modified version, remove a logo, or identify your
- such a rule still leaves you the choice of whether to publish your version
+ modifications as yours.  As long as these requirements are not so
- at all.)  Rules that require release of source code to the users for
+ burdensome that they effectively hamper you from releasing your
- versions that you put into public use are also acceptable.  It is also
+ changes, they are acceptable; you're already making other changes to
- acceptable for the license to require that, if you have distributed a
+ the program, so you won't have trouble making a few more.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Rules that &ldquo;if you make your version available in this way, you
+ must make it available in that way also&rdquo; can be acceptable too,
+ on the same condition.  An example of such an acceptable rule is one
+ saying that if you have distributed a
  modified version and a previous developer asks for a copy of it, you
- must send one, or that you identify yourself on your modifications.
+ must send one.  (Note that such a rule still leaves you the choice of
+ whether to distribute your version at all.)  Rules that require release
+ of source code to the users for versions that you put into public use
+ are also acceptable.
  </p>
  <p>
+ A special issue arises when a license requires changing the name by
+ which the program will be invoked from other programs.  That
+ effectively hampers you from releasing your changed version so that it
+ can replace the original when invoked by those other programs.  This
+ sort of requirement is acceptable only if there's a suitable aliasing
+ facility that allows you to specify the original program's name as an
+ alias for the modified version.</p>
+ <p>
  In the GNU project, we use
- <q><a href="/copyleft/copyleft.html">copyleft</a></q>
+ <a href="/copyleft/copyleft.html">copyleft</a>
  to protect these freedoms legally for everyone.  But
- <a href="/philosophy/categories.html#Non-CopyleftedFreeSoftware">non-copylefted
+ <a href="/philosophy/categories.html#Non-CopyleftedFreeSoftware">noncopylefted
  free software</a> also exists.  We believe there are important reasons why
- <a href="/philosophy/pragmatic.html"> it is better to use copyleft</a>,
+ <a href="/philosophy/pragmatic.html">it is better to use copyleft</a>,
- but if your program is non-copylefted free software, we can still
+ but if your program is noncopylefted free software, it is still basically
- use it.
+ ethical. (See <a href="/philosophy/categories.html">Categories of Free Software</a> for a description of how &ldquo;free software,&rdquo; &ldquo;copylefted software&rdquo; and other categories of software relate to each other.)
- </p>
- <p>
- See <a href="/philosophy/categories.html">Categories of Free Software</a>
- for a description of how <q>free software,</q> <q>copylefted software</q>
- and other categories of software relate to each other.
  </p>
  <p>
-Line 193 
 programs internationally.  Software deve
+Line 236 
 programs internationally.  Software deve
  eliminate or override these restrictions, but what they can and must do
  is refuse to impose them as conditions of use of the program.  In this
  way, the restrictions will not affect activities and people outside the
- jurisdictions of these governments.
+ jurisdictions of these governments.  Thus, free software licenses
+ must not require obedience to any nontrivial export regulations as a
+ condition of exercising any of the essential freedoms.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Merely mentioning the existence of export regulations, without making
+ them a condition of the license itself, is acceptable since it does
+ not restrict users.  If an export regulation is actually trivial for
+ free software, then requiring it as a condition is not an actual
+ problem; however, it is a potential problem, since a later change in
+ export law could make the requirement nontrivial and thus render the
+ software nonfree.
  </p>
  <p>
-Line 204 
 is unlikely to have some other sort of p
+Line 259 
 is unlikely to have some other sort of p
  (though this does happen occasionally).  However, some free software
  licenses are based on contracts, and contracts can impose a much larger
  range of possible restrictions.  That means there are many possible ways
- such a license could be unacceptably restrictive and non-free.
+ such a license could be unacceptably restrictive and nonfree.
  </p>
  <p>
-Line 212 
 We can't possibly list all the ways that
+Line 267 
 We can't possibly list all the ways that
  contract-based license restricts the user in an unusual way that
  copyright-based licenses cannot, and which isn't mentioned here as
  legitimate, we will have to think about it, and we will probably conclude
- it is non-free.
+ it is nonfree.
  </p>
  <p>
  When talking about free software, it is best to avoid using terms
- like <q>give away</q> or <q>for free,</q> because those terms imply that
+ like &ldquo;give away&rdquo; or &ldquo;for free,&rdquo; because those terms imply that
  the issue is about price, not freedom.  Some common terms such
- as <q>piracy</q> embody opinions we hope you won't endorse.  See
+ as &ldquo;piracy&rdquo; embody opinions we hope you won't endorse.  See
  <a href="/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html">Confusing Words and Phrases that
  are Worth Avoiding</a> for a discussion of these terms.  We also have
- a list of <a href="/philosophy/fs-translations.html">translations of
+ a list of proper <a href="/philosophy/fs-translations.html">translations of
- <q>free software</q></a> into various languages.
+ &ldquo;free software&rdquo;</a> into various languages.
  </p>
  <p>
-Line 249 
 listed there, you can ask us about it by
+Line 304 
 listed there, you can ask us about it by
  </p>
  <p>
- If you are contemplating writing a new license, please contact the FSF
+ If you are contemplating writing a new license, please contact the
- by writing to that address. The proliferation of different free software
+ Free Software Foundation first by writing to that address. The
- licenses means increased work for users in understanding the licenses;
+ proliferation of different free software licenses means increased work
- we may be able to help you find an existing Free Software license that
+ for users in understanding the licenses; we may be able to help you
- meets your needs.
+ find an existing free software license that meets your needs.
  </p>
  <p>
  If that isn't possible, if you really need a new license, with our
- help you can ensure that the license really is a Free Software license
+ help you can ensure that the license really is a free software license
  and avoid various practical problems.
  </p>
- <hr />
+ <h3 id="beyond-software">Beyond Software</h3>
  <p>
- Another group has started using the term <q>open source</q> to mean
+ <a href="/philosophy/free-doc.html">Software manuals must be free</a>,
- something close (but not identical) to <q>free software.</q>  We prefer
+ for the same reasons that software must be free, and because the
- the term <q>free software</q> because, once you have heard it refers to
+ manuals are in effect part of the software.
- freedom rather than price, <a href="free-software-for-freedom.html">it
- calls to mind freedom</a>.  The word <q>open</q> never does that.
- </p>
- <hr />
- <h4><a href="/philosophy/philosophy.html">Other Texts to Read</a></h4>
- <div class="translations">
- <p><a id="translations"></a>
- <b>Translations of this page</b>:<br />
- <!-- Please keep this list alphabetical, and in the original -->
- <!-- language if possible, otherwise default to English -->
- <!-- If you do not have it English, please comment what the -->
- <!-- English is.  If you add a new language here, please -->
- <!-- advise web-translators@gnu.org and add it to -->
- <!--    - in /home/www/bin/nightly-vars either TAGSLANG or WEBLANG -->
- <!--    - in /home/www/html/server/standards/README.translations.html -->
- <!--      one of the lists under the section "Translations Underway" -->
- <!--    - if there is a translation team, you also have to add an alias -->
- <!--      to mail.gnu.org:/com/mailer/aliases -->
- <!-- Please also check you have the 2 letter language code right versus -->
- <!--     http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/IG/ert/iso639.htm -->
- [
-   <a href="/philosophy/free-sw.ar.html">&#1575;&#1604;&#1593;&#1585;&#1576;&#1610;&#1577;</a> <!-- Arabic -->
- | <a href="/philosophy/free-sw.bg.html">&#x431;&#x44A;&#x43B;&#x433;&#x430;&#x440;&#x441;&#x43A;&#x438;</a>  <!-- Bulgarian -->
- | <a href="/philosophy/free-sw.ca.html">Catal&#x00e0;</a>       <!-- Catalan -->
- <!-- Chinese (Simplified) -->
- | <a href="/philosophy/free-sw.cn.html">&#x7b80;&#x4f53;&#x4e2d;&#x6587;</a>
- <!-- Chinese (Traditional) -->
- | <a href="/philosophy/free-sw.zh.html">&#x7e41;&#x9ad4;&#x4e2d;&#x6587;</a>
- | <a href="/philosophy/free-sw.cs.html">&#x010c;esky</a>        <!-- Czech -->
- | <a href="/philosophy/free-sw.da.html">Dansk</a>       <!-- Danish -->
- | <a href="/philosophy/free-sw.de.html">Deutsch</a>     <!-- German -->
- | <a href="/philosophy/free-sw.html">English</a>
- | <a href="/philosophy/free-sw.el.html">Ελληνικά</a>  <!--Greek-->
- | <a href="/philosophy/free-sw.es.html">Espa&#x00f1;ol</a>      <!-- Spanish -->
- | <a href="/philosophy/free-sw.eo.html">Esperanto</a>
- <!-- Persian/Farsi -->
- | <a href="/philosophy/free-sw.fa.html">&#x0641;&#x0627;&#x0631;&#x0633;&#x06cc;</a>
- | <a href="/philosophy/free-sw.fr.html">Fran&#x00e7;ais</a>     <!-- French -->
- | <a href="/philosophy/free-sw.gl.html">Galego</a>      <!-- Galician -->
- | <a href="/philosophy/free-sw.he.html">&#x05e2;&#x05d1;&#x05e8;&#x05d9;&#x05ea;</a>    <!-- Hebrew -->
- | <a href="/philosophy/free-sw.hr.html">Hrvatski</a>    <!-- Croatian -->
- | <a href="/philosophy/free-sw.id.html">Bahasa Indonesia</a>    <!-- Indonesian -->
- | <a href="/philosophy/free-sw.it.html">Italiano</a>    <!-- Italian -->
- | <a href="/philosophy/free-sw.ja.html">&#x65e5;&#x672c;&#x8a9e;</a>    <!-- Japanese -->
- | <a href="/philosophy/free-sw.ko.html">&#xd55c;&#xad6d;&#xc5b4;</a>    <!-- Korean -->
- | <a href="/philosophy/free-sw.hu.html">Magyar</a>      <!-- Hungarian -->
- | <a href="/philosophy/free-sw.nl.html">Nederlands</a>  <!-- Dutch -->
- | <a href="/philosophy/free-sw.no.html">Norsk</a>       <!-- Norwegian -->
- | <a href="/philosophy/free-sw.pl.html">Polski</a>      <!-- Polish -->
- | <a href="/philosophy/free-sw.pt.html">Portugu&#x0ea;s</a>     <!-- Portuguese -->
- | <a href="/philosophy/free-sw.ro.html">Rom&#x00e2;n&#x0103;</a>        <!-- Romanian -->
- | <a href="/philosophy/free-sw.ru.html">&#1056;&#1091;&#1089;&#1089;&#1082;&#1080;&#1081;</a> <!-- Russian -->
- | <a href="/philosophy/free-sw.sl.html">Slovinsko</a>   <!--- Slovenian -->
- | <a href="/philosophy/free-sw.sr.html">&#x0421;&#x0440;&#x043f;&#x0441;&#x043a;&#x0438;</a> <!-- Serbian -->
- | <a href="/philosophy/free-sw.tl.html">Tagalog</a>     <!-- Tagalog -->
- | <a href="/philosophy/free-sw.tr.html">T&#x00fc;rk&#x00e7;e</a>        <!-- Turkish -->
- ]
  </p>
- </div>
- <div class="copyright">
  <p>
- Return to the <a href="/home.html">GNU Project home page</a>.
+ The same arguments also make sense for other kinds of works of
+ practical use &mdash; that is to say, works that embody useful knowledge,
+ such as educational works and reference
+ works.  <a href="http://wikipedia.org">Wikipedia</a> is the best-known
+ example.
  </p>
  <p>
- Please send FSF &amp; GNU inquiries to
+ Any kind of work <em>can</em> be free, and the definition of free software
- <a href="mailto:gnu@gnu.org"><em>gnu@gnu.org</em></a>.
+ has been extended to a definition of <a href="http://freedomdefined.org/">
- There are also <a href="/home.html#ContactInfo">other ways to contact</a>
+ free cultural works</a> applicable to any kind of works.
- the FSF.
- <br />
- Please send broken links and other corrections (or suggestions) to
- <a href="mailto:webmasters@gnu.org"><em>webmasters@gnu.org</em></a>.
  </p>
- <p>
+ <h3 id="open-source">Open Source?</h3>
- Please see the
- <a href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
- README</a> for information on coordinating and submitting
- translations of this article.
- </p>
  <p>
- Copyright (C) 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004 Free
+ Another group has started using the term &ldquo;open source&rdquo; to mean
- Software Foundation, Inc., 51 Franklin St, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA
+ something close (but not identical) to &ldquo;free software&rdquo;.  We
-,  USA
+ prefer the term &ldquo;free software&rdquo; because, once you have heard that
- <br />
+ it refers to freedom rather than price, it calls to mind freedom.  The
- Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire article is
+ word &ldquo;open&rdquo; <a href="/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html">
- permitted in any medium without royalty provided this notice is
+ never refers to freedom</a>.
- preserved.
  </p>
- <p>
+ <h3 id="History">History</h3>
- Updated:
+ <p>From time to time we revise this Free Software Definition.  Here is
+ the list of substantive changes, along with links to show exactly what
+ was changed.</p>
+ <ul>
+ <li><a href="http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewvc/www/philosophy/free-sw.html?root=www&amp;r1=1.121&amp;r2=1.122">Version
+.122</a>: An export control requirement is a real problem if the
+ requirement is nontrivial; otherwise it is only a potential problem.</li>
+ <li><a href="http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewvc/www/philosophy/free-sw.html?root=www&amp;r1=1.117&amp;r2=1.118">Version
+.118</a>: Clarification: the issue is limits on your right to modify,
+ not on what modifications you have made.  And modifications are not limited
+ to &ldquo;improvements&rdquo;</li>
+ <li><a href="http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewvc/www/philosophy/free-sw.html?root=www&amp;r1=1.110&amp;r2=1.111">Version
+.111</a>: Clarify 1.77 by saying that only
+ retroactive <em>restrictions</em> are unacceptable.  The copyright
+ holders can always grant additional <em>permission</em> for use of the
+ work by releasing the work in another way in parallel.</li>
+ <li><a href="http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewvc/www/philosophy/free-sw.html?root=www&amp;r1=1.104&amp;r2=1.105">Version
+.105</a>: Reflect, in the brief statement of freedom 1, the point
+ (already stated in version 1.80) that it includes really using your modified
+ version for your computing.</li>
+ <li><a href="http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewvc/www/philosophy/free-sw.html?root=www&amp;r1=1.91&amp;r2=1.92">Version
+.92</a>: Clarify that obfuscated code does not qualify as source code.</li>
+ <li><a href="http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewvc/www/philosophy/free-sw.html?root=www&amp;r1=1.89&amp;r2=1.90">Version
+.90</a>: Clarify that freedom 3 means the right to distribute copies
+ of your own modified or improved version, not a right to participate
+ in someone else's development project.</li>
+ <li><a href="http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewvc/www/philosophy/free-sw.html?root=www&amp;r1=1.88&amp;r2=1.89">Version
+.89</a>: Freedom 3 includes the right to release modified versions as
+ free software.</li>
+ <li><a href="http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewvc/www/philosophy/free-sw.html?root=www&amp;r1=1.79&amp;r2=1.80">Version
+.80</a>: Freedom 1 must be practical, not just theoretical;
+ i.e., no tivoization.</li>
+ <li><a href="http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewvc/www/philosophy/free-sw.html?root=www&amp;r1=1.76&amp;r2=1.77">Version
+.77</a>: Clarify that all retroactive changes to the license are
+ unacceptable, even if it's not described as a complete
+ replacement.</li>
+ <li><a href="http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewvc/www/philosophy/free-sw.html?root=www&amp;r1=1.73&amp;r2=1.74">Version
+.74</a>: Four clarifications of points not explicit enough, or stated
+ in some places but not reflected everywhere:
+ <ul>
+ <li>"Improvements" does not mean the license can
+ substantively limit what kinds of modified versions you can release.
+ Freedom 3 includes distributing modified versions, not just changes.</li>
+ <li>The right to merge in existing modules
+ refers to those that are suitably licensed.</li>
+ <li>Explicitly state the conclusion of the point about export controls.</li>
+ <li>Imposing a license change constitutes revoking the old license.</li>
+ </ul>
+ </li>
+ <li><a href="http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewvc/www/philosophy/free-sw.html?root=www&amp;r1=1.56&amp;r2=1.57">Version
+.57</a>: Add &quot;Beyond Software&quot; section.</li>
+ <li><a href="http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewvc/www/philosophy/free-sw.html?root=www&amp;r1=1.45&amp;r2=1.46">Version
+.46</a>: Clarify whose purpose is significant in the freedom to run
+ the program for any purpose.</li>
+ <li><a href="http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewvc/www/philosophy/free-sw.html?root=www&amp;r1=1.40&amp;r2=1.41">Version
+.41</a>: Clarify wording about contract-based licenses.</li>
+ <li><a href="http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewvc/www/philosophy/free-sw.html?root=www&amp;r1=1.39&amp;r2=1.40">Version
+.40</a>: Explain that a free license must allow to you use other
+ available free software to create your modifications.</li>
+ <li><a href="http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewvc/www/philosophy/free-sw.html?root=www&amp;r1=1.38&amp;r2=1.39">Version
+.39</a>: Note that it is acceptable for a license to require you to
+ provide source for versions of the software you put into public
+ use.</li>
+ <li><a href="http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewvc/www/philosophy/free-sw.html?root=www&amp;r1=1.30&amp;r2=1.31">Version
+.31</a>: Note that it is acceptable for a license to require you to
+ identify yourself as the author of modifications.  Other minor
+ clarifications throughout the text.</li>
+ <li><a href="http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewvc/www/philosophy/free-sw.html?root=www&amp;r1=1.22&amp;r2=1.23">Version
+.23</a>: Address potential problems related to contract-based
+ licenses.</li>
+ <li><a href="http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewvc/www/philosophy/free-sw.html?root=www&amp;r1=1.15&amp;r2=1.16">Version
+.16</a>: Explain why distribution of binaries is important.</li>
+ <li><a href="http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewvc/www/philosophy/free-sw.html?root=www&amp;r1=1.10&amp;r2=1.11">Version
+.11</a>: Note that a free license may require you to send a copy of
+ versions you distribute to the author.</li>
+ </ul>
+ <p>There are gaps in the version numbers shown above because there are
+ other changes in this page that do not affect the definition or its
+ interpretations.  For instance, the list does not include changes in
+ asides, formatting, spelling, punctuation, or other parts of the page.
+ You can review the complete list of changes to the page through
+ the <a href="http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewvc/www/philosophy/free-sw.html?root=www&amp;view=log">cvsweb
+ interface</a>.</p>
+ </div><!-- for id="content", starts in the include above -->
+ <!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
+ <div id="footer">
+ <p>Please send general FSF &amp; GNU inquiries to
+ <a href="mailto:gnu@gnu.org">&lt;gnu@gnu.org&gt;</a>.
+ There are also <a href="/contact/">other ways to contact</a>
+ the FSF.  Broken links and other corrections or suggestions can be sent
+ to <a href="mailto:webmasters@gnu.org">&lt;webmasters@gnu.org&gt;</a>.</p>
+ <p><!-- TRANSLATORS: Ignore the original text in this paragraph,
+         replace it with the translation of these two:
+         We work hard and do our best to provide accurate, good quality
+         translations.  However, we are not exempt from imperfection.
+         Please send your comments and general suggestions in this regard
+         to <a href="mailto:web-translators@gnu.org">
+         &lt;web-translators@gnu.org&gt;</a>.</p>
+         <p>For information on coordinating and submitting translations of
+         our web pages, see <a
+         href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
+         README</a>. -->
+ Please see the <a
+ href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
+ README</a> for information on coordinating and submitting translations
+ of this article.</p>
+ <!-- Regarding copyright, in general, standalone pages (as opposed to
+      files generated as part of manuals) on the GNU web server should
+      be under CC BY-ND 3.0 US.  Please do NOT change or remove this
+      without talking with the webmasters or licensing team first.
+      Please make sure the copyright date is consistent with the
+      document.  For web pages, it is ok to list just the latest year the
+      document was modified, or published.
+      If you wish to list earlier years, that is ok too.
+      Either "2001, 2002, 2003" or "2001-2003" are ok for specifying
+      years, as long as each year in the range is in fact a copyrightable
+      year, i.e., a year in which the document was published (including
+      being publicly visible on the web or in a revision control system).
+      There is more detail about copyright years in the GNU Maintainers
+      Information document, www.gnu.org/prep/maintain. -->
+ <p>Copyright &copy; 1996-2002, 2004-2007, 2009, 2010, 2012, 2013
+ Free Software Foundation, Inc.</p>
+ <p>This page is licensed under a <a rel="license"
+ href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/us/">Creative
+ Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 United States License</a>.</p>
+ <!--#include virtual="/server/bottom-notes.html" -->
+ <p>Updated:
  <!-- timestamp start -->
- $Date$ $Author$
+ $Date$
  <!-- timestamp end -->
  </p>
  </div>
+ </div>
  </body>
  </html>

 Legend:



Removed from v.1.50
 


changed lines


 
Added in v.1.126
 Legend:



Removed from v.1.50
 


changed lines


 
Added in v.1.126
-Removed from v.1.50
+Added in v.1.126

savannah-hackers-public@gnu.org	ViewVC Help
Powered by ViewVC 1.1.26