Defining Free Software Business
Alfred M. Szmidt
ams at gnu.org
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