Indeed. The actual definition says: "The freedom to run the program as you wish, for any purpose (freedom 0)." I simplified too much. To GP: > There are degre

Indeed. The actual definition says: "The freedom to run the program as you wish, for any purpose (freedom 0)." I simplified too much. To GP: > There are degrees to freedom, and while FOSS activists would like to paint issues black and white, they really are not There are software that are free software, and software that are not free software. This is the whole point of a good definition. Actually assessing whether a program is free software might be hard, but at the end no software is between free software and non-free software. Now we can argue on a level of freedom but we are not talking about this definition anymore.