[LUAU] the term "open source" is dead, says Eben Moglen

[Jimen Ching]

On Wed, 22 Nov 2006, Dave Burns wrote:
> I'm surprised, I would have thought that debian only cared about the 
> actual license that was used.

Yes, exactly.  Open Source and Free Software are categories of software 
that uses specific licenses.  I.e. GCC is Free Software because it's 
licensed under the GPL.  Mozilla is Open Source because it's not.

Open Source is a term created by ESR because he didn't like the GPL.  He 
wanted a way to idenify software products that allows distribution of the 
source code, but isn't licensed under the GPL.

The problem is, without the _modify and redistribute_ clause that the GPL 
provides, these other licenses don't protect your rights.  As a result, 
the "open source" term no longer means the same thing it did before 
Microsoft hijacked it.  Thus, the "open source" term 'is dead' claim.

The best way to understand why this claim is made, is to go back into 
history and find out why ESR creatd this term in the first place; how this 
term differs from 'Free Software', and then think about what Microsoft and 
Novell is doing to redefine what is considered 'Open Source'.  Then, 
you'll understand...

--jc
-- 
Jimen Ching (WH6BRR)      jching at flex.com     wh6brr at uhm.ampr.org