-Freedom 3 includes the freedom to use release your modified versions +Freedom 3 includes the freedom to release your modified versions as free software. A free license may also permit other ways of releasing them; in other words, it does not have to be a copyleft license. However, a @@ -157,35 +157,38 @@
-However, rules about how to package a modified version are acceptable, if they -don't substantively limit your freedom to release modified versions, or -your freedom to make and use modified versions privately. Rules that “if -you make your version available in this way, you must make it available in -that way also” can be acceptable too, on the same condition. (Note that -such a rule still leaves you the choice of whether to publish 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. It is also -acceptable for the license to require that you identify -your modifications as yours, or that, if you have distributed a modified -version and a previous developer asks for a copy of it, you must send -one. +However, rules about how to package a modified version are acceptable, +if they don't substantively limit your freedom to release modified +versions, or your freedom to make and use modified versions privately. +Thus, it is acceptable for the license to require that you change the +name of the modified version, remove a logo, or identify your +modifications as yours. As long as these requirements are not so +burdensome that they effectively hamper you from releasing your +changes, they are acceptable; you're already making other changes to +the program, so you won't have trouble making a few more. +
+ ++Rules that “if you make your version available in this way, you +must make it available in that way also” 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. (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.
In the GNU project, we use -“copyleft” +copyleft to protect these freedoms legally for everyone. But -non-copylefted +noncopylefted free software also exists. We believe there are important reasons why it is better to use copyleft, -but if your program is non-copylefted free software, it is still basically -ethical. -
- --See Categories of Free Software -for a description of how “free software,” “copylefted software” -and other categories of software relate to each other. +but if your program is noncopylefted free software, it is still basically +ethical. (See Categories of Free Software for a description of how “free software,” “copylefted software” and other categories of software relate to each other.)
@@ -278,7 +281,7 @@ The same arguments also make sense for other kinds of works of practical use — that is to say, works that embody useful knowledge, such as educational works and reference -works. Wikipedia is the best known +works. Wikipedia is the best-known example.
@@ -411,8 +414,8 @@-Copyright © 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, -2005, 2006, 2007, 2009 Free Software Foundation, Inc. +Copyright © 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2004, +2005, 2006, 2007, 2009, 2010 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire article is permitted in any medium without royalty provided this notice is @@ -422,7 +425,7 @@
Updated: -$Date: 2010/03/30 05:22:50 $ +$Date: 2010/11/12 18:54:21 $
@@ -430,18 +433,21 @@