> You cannot, for example, package it, call it something else and distribute it without the source. I don't see how that can be called freedom. It's intended

> You cannot, for example, package it, call it something else and distribute it without the source. I don't see how that can be called freedom. It's intended to maximize freedom to modify and inspect as a whole not at every individual while ensuring that the freedom to do so it preserved for future users. It's a pretty simple and consistent goal and it focuses on the freedoms of the user instead of the freedom of developers. Where those come into conflict like a developer using the code then it defers to the freedoms of 'end' users because in every case the developer of any given application that's used will be outnumbered by the users of that application. That's my take on it's goals at least.