Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Free Software CD for Windows?

[Gustavo C. M.]

I don't know about the particularities of the English language, but what
varies there is not the DEFINITION of Freedom, but the ACCEPTANCE of
non-free stuff.

https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/philosophy.html
"Specifically, free software means users have the four essential
freedoms[1]: (0) to run the program, (1) to study and change the program
in source code form, (2) to redistribute exact copies, and (3) to
distribute modified versions."
[1] https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html

This definition is pretty objective. What varies between GNU/Linux
distros is their concern about ethics and coherence within themselves.

Em Dom, 2012-12-02 às 11:18 +0200, Alexey Eromenko escreveu:
> The definition of Freedom changes from one distro to the next.
> 
> Examples:
> Red Hat allows for non-free firmware, but no patented codecs (only WebM/OGG).
> Debian allows for patented-codecs (MP3/MPEG4) and cloud-dependent
> software (such as twitter-plugins), but only free firmware. Go figure.
> 
> I have written a VERY interesting article "Why I consider
> cloud-dependent packages as non-free software ?"
> Will start a separate topic on it.
>

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part