Brasilian state aproves "opensource" law
rubini at gnu.org
Fri Dec 6 22:53:55 UTC 2002
> I _really_ hope Article 1 was changed, for it seems to forbid most free
> software, along with all proprietary software:
Can you say why, please?
> An open program is that which has a an intellectual or ind= ustrial
> property license that does not restrict in any form copying,
> distributing, usage or altering its original characteristics,
This is good.
> assuring the user unrestricted, and without extra costs, access to
> its source code, permitting partial or total modification of the
> program for its perfection or adaptation.
This is good too. The "no extra cost" for source is fine. A commercial
distribution must include sources. If source it's at extra cost than
it's not free, right?
[Yes, I know source can come later, at "no more than your cost of
physically performing source distribution" but this is a detail, isn't
/alessandro, happy that art. 2 defines "source" like the GPL does.
More information about the Discussion