Defining Free Software Business

Alfred M. Szmidt ams at
Tue Jun 27 01:54:09 UTC 2006

   [Please don't send me copies of messages to the list.]

Sorry, but I can't keep track of who is or isn't subscribed to this
list.  It is normal practise to always CC everyone.

   >    What do you think of the suggestion made to draw lines similar
   >    to those drawn by the Debian project: "free", "free but
   >    currently depends on non-free", "non-free".
   > A bad idea, since just like Debian, you end up recommending and
   > condoning non-free software by recommending businesses that
   > perform unethical practises.

   I don't see how you make this connection. Why would a
   classification as I suggested necessarily "end up" as a

Since these companies will be listed as GBN friendly companies (with a
little sign saying something about their "status"), you tell users
that these companies are OK.  When infact, they are not, since they
recommend/develop non-free software.  What is the point to classify
businesses that do something that is not acceptable?

Cheers (and bed time for me)

More information about the Discussion mailing list