I have. The site appears to be down at present but I recall that's all about distributing free software, that charging doesn't make it non-free software. I am well aware of that.https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.htmlonly on the payment of a fee to the original developer
You did not bother reading the link?
That wasn't what I was talking about.
What I am talking about is not being able to use, modify or share without paying the original developer a licence fee.
That fits your stated definition of "free software" but it doesn't fit mine, and it doesn't fit Stallman's or the FSF's definitions either.
I am prepared to accept Stallman's and the FSF's definition of what "free software" is; it's just that I don't accept yours which is much wider than theirs.
If you are referring to Free Software as defined by Stallman and the FSF you should not say "Free software is software you can use, share, modify and redistribute" because that is much wider than their definition. You need to add "as defined by Stallman and the FSF" or similar.
Statistics: Posted by hippy — Tue Dec 30, 2025 5:30 pm