Objective of IFSO Re: [Fsfe-ie] stuff from the past week [adelaney at cs.may.ie]

[Niall Douglas]

On 31 Oct 2003 at 20:23, David Golden wrote:

> > The term "open source" is ambiguous enough, because one could
> > believe that the source is completely open and viewable to anybody
> > or the source is open for the intended recipient (i.e.  the
> > purchaser).
> 
> "Open Source" (note capitals) is quite well defined by the OSI
> Definition or DFSG (Debian Free Software Guidlines), at this stage,
> despite Microsoftie attempts to dilute the term.

The problem is that the term, irrespective of whoever defines it, 
means what it means in English ie; any software is open source if it 
comes with source.

Therefore MS can quite rightly argue that Windows is open source 
because they'll supply you with it for a very large fee and no end of 
NDAs.

Going with "open source" is a recipe for hijacking by the BSI who if 
you remember during the recent software patent battle, called 
themselves the "open standards" institute or something.

Cheers,
Niall




-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 208 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mail.fsfeurope.org/pipermail/fsfe-ie/attachments/20031101/5f701de4/attachment.pgp