2 ms·
Maybe that's a rule you have but don't speak for the rest of us.
by HeatrayEnjoyer 2y ago
Maybe that's a rule you have but don't speak for the rest of us.
- lolinder 2y agoThey should have put Free Software in capitals to be more clear, but they're referring to the Four Essential Freedoms as defined by the Free Software Foundation [0]: > The freedom to run the program as you wish, for any purpose (freedom 0). ... “Free software” does not mean “noncommercial.” On the contrary, a free program must be available for commercial use, commercial development, and commercial distribution. This policy is of fundamental importance—without this, free software could not achieve its aims. You're welcome to come up with a different set of coherent rules for an ethical model of software development, but to avoid confusion it would be best to use a different label than "free software" so we don't overload the term with conflicting definitions. [0] https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.en.html#four-freedoms https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.en.html#four-freedoms