diff -r 000000000000 -r 0e4335f01909 freedom.rst
--- /dev/null	Thu Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 +0000
+++ b/freedom.rst	Mon Dec 01 22:44:15 2008 +0200
@@ -0,0 +1,253 @@
+-*- mode: outline; fill-column:78 -*-
+
+* The Open Source Definition (Annotated)
+
+Version 1.9
+
+The indented, italicized sections below appear as annotations to the Open Source
+Definition (OSD) and are not a part of the OSD. A plain version of the OSD without
+annotations can be found here. Introduction
+
+Open source doesn't just mean access to the source code. The distribution terms of
+open-source software must comply with the following criteria:
+
+1. Free Redistribution
+
+The license shall not restrict any party from selling or giving away the software as a
+component of an aggregate software distribution containing programs from several different
+sources. The license shall not require a royalty or other fee for such sale.
+
+Rationale: By constraining the license to require free redistribution, we eliminate the
+temptation to throw away many long-term gains in order to make a few short-term sales
+dollars. If we didn't do this, there would be lots of pressure for cooperators to defect.
+
+2. Source Code
+
+The program must include source code, and must allow distribution in source code as well
+as compiled form. Where some form of a product is not distributed with source code, there
+must be a well-publicized means of obtaining the source code for no more than a reasonable
+reproduction cost preferably, downloading via the Internet without charge. The source code
+must be the preferred form in which a programmer would modify the program. Deliberately
+obfuscated source code is not allowed. Intermediate forms such as the output of a
+preprocessor or translator are not allowed.
+
+Rationale: We require access to un-obfuscated source code because you can't evolve
+programs without modifying them. Since our purpose is to make evolution easy, we require
+that modification be made easy.
+
+3. Derived Works
+
+The license must allow modifications and derived works, and must allow them to be
+distributed under the same terms as the license of the original software.
+
+Rationale: The mere ability to read source isn't enough to support independent peer review
+and rapid evolutionary selection. For rapid evolution to happen, people need to be able to
+experiment with and redistribute modifications.
+
+4. Integrity of The Author's Source Code
+
+The license may restrict source-code from being distributed in modified form only if the
+license allows the distribution of "patch files" with the source code for the purpose of
+modifying the program at build time. The license must explicitly permit distribution of
+software built from modified source code. The license may require derived works to carry a
+different name or version number from the original software.
+
+Rationale: Encouraging lots of improvement is a good thing, but users have a right to know
+who is responsible for the software they are using. Authors and maintainers have
+reciprocal right to know what they're being asked to support and protect their
+reputations.
+
+Accordingly, an open-source license must guarantee that source be readily available, but
+may require that it be distributed as pristine base sources plus patches. In this way,
+"unofficial" changes can be made available but readily distinguished from the base source.
+
+5. No Discrimination Against Persons or Groups
+
+The license must not discriminate against any person or group of persons.
+
+Rationale: In order to get the maximum benefit from the process, the maximum diversity of
+persons and groups should be equally eligible to contribute to open sources. Therefore we
+forbid any open-source license from locking anybody out of the process.
+
+Some countries, including the United States, have export restrictions for certain types of
+software. An OSD-conformant license may warn licensees of applicable restrictions and
+remind them that they are obliged to obey the law; however, it may not incorporate such
+restrictions itself.
+
+6. No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor
+
+The license must not restrict anyone from making use of the program in a specific field of
+endeavor. For example, it may not restrict the program from being used in a business, or
+from being used for genetic research.
+
+Rationale: The major intention of this clause is to prohibit license traps that prevent
+open source from being used commercially. We want commercial users to join our community,
+not feel excluded from it.
+
+7. Distribution of License
+
+The rights attached to the program must apply to all to whom the program is redistributed
+without the need for execution of an additional license by those parties.
+
+Rationale: This clause is intended to forbid closing up software by indirect means such as
+requiring a non-disclosure agreement.
+
+8. License Must Not Be Specific to a Product
+
+The rights attached to the program must not depend on the program's being part of a
+particular software distribution. If the program is extracted from that distribution and
+used or distributed within the terms of the program's license, all parties to whom the
+program is redistributed should have the same rights as those that are granted in
+conjunction with the original software distribution.
+
+Rationale: This clause forecloses yet another class of license traps.
+
+9. License Must Not Restrict Other Software
+
+The license must not place restrictions on other software that is distributed along with
+the licensed software. For example, the license must not insist that all other programs
+distributed on the same medium must be open-source software.
+
+Rationale: Distributors of open-source software have the right to make their own choices
+about their own software.
+
+Yes, the GPL is conformant with this requirement. Software linked with GPLed libraries
+only inherits the GPL if it forms a single work, not any software with which they are
+merely distributed.
+
+10. License Must Be Technology-Neutral
+
+No provision of the license may be predicated on any individual technology or style of
+interface.
+
+Rationale: This provision is aimed specifically at licenses which require an explicit
+gesture of assent in order to establish a contract between licensor and licensee.
+Provisions mandating so-called "click-wrap" may conflict with important methods of
+software distribution such as FTP download, CD-ROM anthologies, and web mirroring; such
+provisions may also hinder code re-use. Conformant licenses must allow for the possibility
+that (a) redistribution of the software will take place over non-Web channels that do not
+support click-wrapping of the download, and that (b) the covered code (or re-used portions
+of covered code) may run in a non-GUI environment that cannot support popup dialogues.
+
+* Social Contract with the Free Software Community
+
+Version 1.1
+
+1. Debian will remain 100% free
+
+We provide the guidelines that we use to determine if a work is free in the document
+entitled The Debian Free Software Guidelines. We promise that the Debian system and all
+its components will be free according to these guidelines. We will support people who
+create or use both free and non-free works on Debian. We will never make the system
+require the use of a non-free component.
+
+2. We will give back to the free software community
+
+When we write new components of the Debian system, we will license them in a manner
+consistent with the Debian Free Software Guidelines. We will make the best system we can,
+so that free works will be widely distributed and used. We will communicate things such as
+bug fixes, improvements and user requests to the upstream authors of works included in our
+system.
+
+3. We will not hide problems
+
+We will keep our entire bug report database open for public view at all times. Reports
+that people file online will promptly become visible to others.
+
+4. Our priorities are our users and free software
+
+We will be guided by the needs of our users and the free software community. We will place
+their interests first in our priorities. We will support the needs of our users for
+operation in many different kinds of computing environments. We will not object to
+non-free works that are intended to be used on Debian systems, or attempt to charge a fee
+to people who create or use such works. We will allow others to create distributions
+containing both the Debian system and other works, without any fee from us. In furtherance
+of these goals, we will provide an integrated system of high-quality materials with no
+legal restrictions that would prevent such uses of the system.
+
+5. Works that do not meet our free software standards
+
+We acknowledge that some of our users require the use of works that do not conform to the
+Debian Free Software Guidelines. We have created contrib and non-free areas in our archive
+for these works. The packages in these areas are not part of the Debian system, although
+they have been configured for use with Debian. We encourage CD manufacturers to read the
+licenses of the packages in these areas and determine if they can distribute the packages
+on their CDs. Thus, although non-free works are not a part of Debian, we support their use
+and provide infrastructure for non-free packages (such as our bug tracking system and
+mailing lists).
+
+* The Debian Free Software Guidelines (DFSG)
+
+ 1. Free Redistribution
+
+The license of a Debian component may not restrict any party from selling or giving away
+the software as a component of an aggregate software distribution containing programs from
+several different sources. The license may not require a royalty or other fee for such
+sale.
+ 
+ 2. Source Code
+
+The program must include source code, and must allow distribution in source code as well
+as compiled form.
+
+3. Derived Works
+
+The license must allow modifications and derived works, and must allow them to be
+distributed under the same terms as the license of the original software.
+
+4. Integrity of The Author's Source Code
+
+The license may restrict source-code from being distributed in modified form _only_ if the
+license allows the distribution of patch files with the source code for the purpose of
+modifying the program at build time. The license must explicitly permit distribution of
+software built from modified source code. The license may require derived works to carry a
+different name or version number from the original software. (This is a compromise. The
+Debian group encourages all authors not to restrict any files, source or binary, from
+being modified.)
+
+5. No Discrimination Against Persons or Groups
+
+The license must not discriminate against any person or group of persons.
+
+6. No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor
+
+The license must not restrict anyone from making use of the program in a specific field of
+endeavor. For example, it may not restrict the program from being used in a business, or
+from being used for genetic research.
+
+7. Distribution of License
+
+The rights attached to the program must apply to all to whom the program is redistributed
+without the need for execution of an additional license by those parties.
+
+8. License Must Not Be Specific to Debian
+
+The rights attached to the program must not depend on the program's being part of a Debian
+system. If the program is extracted from Debian and used or distributed without Debian but
+otherwise within the terms of the program's license, all parties to whom the program is
+redistributed should have the same rights as those that are granted in conjunction with
+the Debian system.
+
+9. License Must Not Contaminate Other Software
+
+The license must not place restrictions on other software that is distributed along with
+the licensed software. For example, the license must not insist that all other programs
+distributed on the same medium must be free software.
+
+10. Example Licenses
+
+The GPL, BSD, and Artistic licenses are examples of licenses that we consider free.
+
+* The Free Software Definition
+
+Free software is a matter of the users' freedom to run, copy, distribute, study, change
+and improve the software. More precisely, it refers to four kinds of freedom, for the
+users of the software:
+
+ * The freedom to run the program, for any purpose (freedom 0).
+ * The freedom to study how the program works, and adapt it to your needs (freedom 1).
+   Access to the source code is a precondition for this.
+ * The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor (freedom 2).
+ * The freedom to improve the program, and release your improvements to the public, so
+   that the whole community benefits (freedom 3).
+ * Access to the source code is a precondition for this.