Why I equate RR/MC with LEGO - FREE, 'FREE' and UNFREE

[Dave LeYanna]

May there be some confusion here caused by equating "free software" with 
"open source software" that is under a license that requires a "source" 
to be distributed as well as the .exe? (And that there is some kind of a 
requirement that source to the "runtimes" be released as well or in some 
cases the "runtimes" are not free and so the "software cannot be "free")

I must admit that I have not read the entire thread but I often see 
"free" and "open source" being equated.

Dave

Ken Ray wrote:

>>This is getting a bit black-and-white again, and what is
>>needed is a MIDDLE WAY - a licence (ideally authored under
>>the supervision and approval of RR) that RR/MC authors can
>>use when they chose to release their end products made with
>>licenced versions of RR/MC into the FREE software arena.
>>    
>>
>
>My understanding is that standalones you make with RR/MC are yours and you
>can do anything you want with them (give them away, sell them, rent them,
>etc.). The only thing you *can't* do is to create a standalone application
>that also creates applications that would compete with Revolution. So I'm
>not sure what this "middle way" is that you are looking for?
>
>
>Ken Ray
>Sons of Thunder Software
>Web site: http://www.sonsothunder.com/
>Email: kray at sonsothunder.com
>
>_______________________________________________
>use-revolution mailing list
>use-revolution at lists.runrev.com
>Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
>http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
>
>
>  
>


-- 
Dave LeYanna
Director IS
Right to Life of Michigan
www.rtl.org