Re: Building An Apple ][ Software Archive

[pausch@saafNOSPAM.se (Paul Schlyter)]

In article <39D77F86.634662B@inetnebr.com>,
Roy and/or Janet Miller  <millers@inetnebr.com> wrote:
>Paul Guertin wrote:
>
>> "Arkain" <rwking@usa.nospam.net> wrote:
>>
>> > The copyright called GPL goes 1 step further [...]
>> > The GPL enforces public domain status.
>>
>> These are mutually exclusive. Something cannot be under copyright
>> and in the public domain at the same time. As GPLed software is
>> under copyright, it is not in the public domain.
>>
>> Unlike the word "freeware", the terms "copyright" and "public domain"
>> have a precise legal meaning. Don't use them loosely.
>
>Thank you Paul. An important point.
>
>So then, the term "freeware" if it  is going to have any real meaning
>must be distinguished from "public domain". If by freeware, all that is
>meant is that it is software that doesn't cost you anything, then we need
>*another* term to distinguish "public domain freeware" from "copyrighted
>freeware."

We already have such a term: public domain.  If a piece of freeware
isn't public domain, it must be copyrighted somehow.

Adding "freeware" after "public domain" is a tautology, since public
domain software always is free to use.


>But, as others have shown, that's what "freeware" was supposed
>to do, distinguish between public domain on one hand, and copyrighted
>software that isn't commercial, and isn't shareware on the other hand.

It's weird that the term "freeware" wasn't supposed to distinguish software
which is free of charge from software which costs money to use legally....

>Roy
>
>>
>>
>> Paul Guertin
>> pg@sff.net
>


-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Schlyter,  Swedish Amateur Astronomer's Society (SAAF)
Grev Turegatan 40,  S-114 38 Stockholm,  SWEDEN
e-mail:  pausch at saaf dot se   or    paul.schlyter at ausys dot se
WWW:     http://hotel04.ausys.se/pausch    http://welcome.to/pausch