On Friday 14 April 2006 06:55, jtd wrote:
The reason the term "Open Source" was coined was to change the world view that gpld software was political and idealogical (which it mostly is ). This helped dilute the political message and focus on the practical aspects of performance and costs, thusmaking it more platable to bussiness. They have succeeded to an extent that now u have two bit reporters and "technologists" pratilling nonsense about free software and even worse companies deliberately misreading or mischaracterising the gpl to extract undue advantage. Which created the necessitity for GPLV3.
Agreed but according to Larry Augustin, Eric Raymond the term Open Source was invented to prevent people from associating "Free Software" with adjectives like "cheap", "worthless", "shoddy". They largely attribute the creation of the term to Christine Peterson.
BUT Open Source software gives you the "freedom" to modify them but they can also be sold at a price > $0 which means you need to *pay* for the software _and_ you'll get the source along with it.
Not true. Open source licences show you the code but can have nasty side effects. And gpld software can be sold for whatever price u deem fit.
Seems you misunderstood what I wrote. The "> $0" means it can be given away free of cost or at any price that the developers see fit.