> what was “free software” was defined by the Free Software Foundation, but in a way that left much to be interpreted
I don't understand what the author means here. What is unclear about the four freedoms? To me, Debian's definition looks redundant.
I don't understand what the author means here. What is unclear about the four freedoms? To me, Debian's definition looks redundant.
And yet that isn't actually good enough. Those general principles, being general rather than specific, require the key word, interpretation, in each new specific context. And different people with different goals can and do always ALWAYS warp interpretation in infinite ways that are all perfectly reasonable sounding on their face, and yet someone else can always produce a totally different interpretation, which also holds together.
The DFSG said yes.
Does a licence says "you may modify this and redistribute it as much as you like, but if you put it on a CD then everything else on there must also be free" count as free?
The DFSG said no.