Jun 27, 2015 Download Principle Component Analysis for free. Bandwidth Analyzer Pack (BAP) is designed to help you better understand your network, plan for various contingencies, and track down problems when they do occur. Java software for your computer, or the Java Runtime Environment, is also referred to as the Java Runtime, Runtime Environment, Runtime, JRE, Java Virtual Machine, Virtual Machine, Java VM, JVM, VM, Java plug-in, Java plugin, Java add-on or Java download.
- Download
Often downloaded with
- BenVista PhotoZoom ProBenVista PhotoZoom Pro 7 is world's number one software solution for enlarging..$197DOWNLOAD
- Mp3Gain PROMp3Gain PRO is the ideal solution to correct volume level problems in your MP3..$24.95DOWNLOAD
- Stock-Signal-Pro TMStock-Signal-Pro is one of the most sophisticated stock timing and trading..DOWNLOAD
- WinGuard ProWinGuard Pro 2016 can Password Protect Programs and encrypt files on your..$9.99DOWNLOAD
- Tech-Pro World ClockIf you need to keep track of the time in different parts of the world, or want..DOWNLOAD
The Free Software Definition
Have a question about free software licensing not answered here?See our other licensing resources,and if necessary contact the FSF Compliance Labat licensing@fsf.org.
The free software definition presents the criteria for whether aparticular software program qualifies as free software. From time totime we revise this definition, to clarify it or to resolve questionsabout subtle issues. See the History sectionbelow for a list of changes that affect the definition of freesoftware.
“Open source” is something different: it has a verydifferent philosophy based on different values. Its practicaldefinition is different too, but nearly all open source programs arein fact free. We explain thedifference in Why “Open Source” misses the point of Free Software.
“Free software” means software that respects users'freedom and community. Roughly, it means that the users have thefreedom to run, copy, distribute, study, change and improve thesoftware. Thus, “free software” is a matter ofliberty, not price. To understand the concept, you should think of“free” as in “free speech,” not as in“free beer”. We sometimes call it “libresoftware,” borrowing the French or Spanish word for“free” as in freedom, to show we do not mean the softwareis gratis.
We campaign for these freedoms because everyone deserves them. Withthese freedoms, the users (both individually and collectively) controlthe program and what it does for them. When users don't control theprogram, we call it a “nonfree” or“proprietary” program. The nonfree program controls theusers, and the developer controls the program; this makes theprogram an instrument of unjust power.
The four essential freedoms
A program is free software if the program's users have thefour essential freedoms: [1]
- The freedom to run the program as you wish, for any purpose (freedom 0).
- The freedom to study how the program works, and change it so it does your computing as you wish (freedom 1). Access to the source code is a precondition for this.
- The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help others (freedom 2).
- The freedom to distribute copies of your modified versions to others (freedom 3). By doing this you can give the whole community a chance to benefit from your changes. Access to the source code is a precondition for this.
A program is free software if it gives users adequately all of thesefreedoms. Otherwise, it is nonfree. While we can distinguish variousnonfree distribution schemes in terms of how far they fall short ofbeing free, we consider them all equally unethical.
In any given scenario, these freedoms must apply to whatever codewe plan to make use of, or lead others to make use of. For instance,consider a program A which automatically launches a program B tohandle some cases. If we plan to distribute A as it stands, thatimplies users will need B, so we need to judge whether both A and Bare free. However, if we plan to modify A so that it doesn't use B,only A needs to be free; B is not pertinent to that plan.
“Free software” does not mean “noncommercial”. A freeprogram must be available for commercial use, commercial development,and commercial distribution. Commercial development of free softwareis no longer unusual; such free commercial software is very important.You may have paid money to get copies of free software, or you may haveobtained copies at no charge. But regardless of how you got your copies,you always have the freedom to copy and change the software, even to sell copies.
A free program must offer the four freedoms to any user that obtains acopy of the software, provided the user has complied thus far with theconditions of the free license covering the software. Putting some ofthe freedoms off limits to some users, or requiring that users pay, inmoney or in kind, to exercise them, is tantamount to not granting thefreedoms in question, and thus renders the program nonfree.
Clarifying the line at various points
In the rest of this article we explain more precisely how far thevarious freedoms need to extend, on various issues, in order for aprogram to be free.
The freedom to run the program as you wish
The freedom to run the program means the freedom for any kind of personor organization to use it on any kind of computer system, for any kind ofoverall job and purpose, without being required to communicate about itwith the developer or any other specific entity. In this freedom, it isthe user's purpose that matters, not the developer'spurpose; you as a user are free to run the program for your purposes,and if you distribute it to someone else, she is then free to run itfor her purposes, but you are not entitled to impose your purposes on her.
The freedom to run the program as you wish means that you are notforbidden or stopped from making it run. This has nothing to do with whatfunctionality the program has, whether it is technically capable offunctioning in any given environment, or whether it is useful for anyparticular computing activity.
For example, if the code arbitrarily rejects certain meaningfulinputs—or even fails unconditionally—that may make theprogram less useful, perhaps even totally useless, but it does notdeny users the freedom to run the program, so it does not conflictwith freedom 0. If the program is free, the users can overcome theloss of usefulness, because freedoms 1 and 3 permit users andcommunities to make and distribute modified versions without thearbitrary nuisance code.
The freedom to study the source code and make changes
In order for freedoms 1 and 3 (the freedom to make changes and thefreedom to publish the changed versions) to be meaningful, you need to haveaccess to the source code of the program. Therefore, accessibility ofsource code is a necessary condition for free software. Obfuscated“source code” is not real source code and does not countas source code.
Freedom 1 includes the freedom to use your changed version in place ofthe original. If the program is delivered in a product designed torun someone else's modified versions but refuse to run yours — apractice known as “tivoization” or “lockdown”,or (in its practitioners' perverse terminology) as “secureboot” — freedom 1 becomes an empty pretense rather than apractical reality. These binaries are not freesoftware even if the source code they are compiled from is free.
One important way to modify a program is by merging in available freesubroutines and modules. If the program's license says that youcannot merge in a suitably licensed existing module — for instance, if itrequires you to be the copyright holder of any code you add — then thelicense is too restrictive to qualify as free.
Whether a change constitutes an improvement is a subjective matter.If your right to modify a program is limited, in substance, to changes thatsomeone else considers an improvement, that program is not free.
The freedom to redistribute if you wish: basic requirements
Freedom to distribute (freedoms 2 and 3) means you are free toredistribute copies, either with or without modifications, eithergratis or charging a fee for distribution, toanyone anywhere. Being free to do thesethings means (among other things) that you do not have to ask or payfor permission to do so.
You should also have the freedom to make modifications and use themprivately in your own work or play, without even mentioning that theyexist. If you do publish your changes, you should not be required tonotify anyone in particular, or in any particular way.
Freedom 3 includes the freedom to release your modified versionsas free software. A free license may also permit other ways ofreleasing them; in other words, it does not have to bea copyleft license. However, alicense that requires modified versions to be nonfree does not qualifyas a free license.
The freedom to redistribute copies must include binary or executableforms of the program, as well as source code, for both modified andunmodified versions. (Distributing programs in runnable form is necessaryfor conveniently installable free operating systems.) It is OK if thereis no way to produce a binary or executable form for a certain program(since some languages don't support that feature), but you must have thefreedom to redistribute such forms should you find or develop a way tomake them.
Copyleft
Certain kinds of rules about the manner of distributing freesoftware are acceptable, when they don't conflict with the centralfreedoms. For example, copyleft(very simply stated) is the rule that when redistributing the program,you cannot add restrictions to deny other people the central freedoms.This rule does not conflict with the central freedoms; rather itprotects them.
In the GNU project, we use copyleft to protect the four freedomslegally for everyone. We believe there are important reasons whyit is better to usecopyleft. Typinator 6.7 download. However,noncopylefted free software is ethicaltoo. See Categories of FreeSoftware for a description of how “free software,”“copylefted software” and other categories of softwarerelate to each other.
Rules about packaging and distribution details
Rules about how to package a modified version are acceptable,if they don't substantively limit your freedom to release modifiedversions, or your freedom to make and use modified versions privately.Thus, it is acceptable for the license to require that you change thename of the modified version, remove a logo, or identify yourmodifications as yours. As long as these requirements are not soburdensome that they effectively hamper you from releasing yourchanges, they are acceptable; you're already making other changes tothe program, so you won't have trouble making a few more.
Rules that “if you make your version available in this way, youmust make it available in that way also” can be acceptable too,on the same condition. An example of such an acceptable rule is onesaying that if you have distributed amodified version and a previous developer asks for a copy of it, youmust send one. (Note that such a rule still leaves you the choice ofwhether to distribute your version at all.) Rules that require releaseof source code to the users for versions that you put into public useare also acceptable.
A special issue arises when a license requires changing the name bywhich the program will be invoked from other programs. Thateffectively hampers you from releasing your changed version so that itcan replace the original when invoked by those other programs. Thissort of requirement is acceptable only if there's a suitable aliasingfacility that allows you to specify the original program's name as analias for the modified version.
Export regulations
Sometimes government export control regulationsand trade sanctions can constrain your freedom to distribute copies ofprograms internationally. Software developers do not have the power toeliminate or override these restrictions, but what they can and must dois refuse to impose them as conditions of use of the program. In thisway, the restrictions will not affect activities and people outside thejurisdictions of these governments. Thus, free software licensesmust not require obedience to any nontrivial export regulations as acondition of exercising any of the essential freedoms.
Merely mentioning the existence of export regulations, without makingthem a condition of the license itself, is acceptable since it doesnot restrict users. If an export regulation is actually trivial forfree software, then requiring it as a condition is not an actualproblem; however, it is a potential problem, since a later change inexport law could make the requirement nontrivial and thus render thesoftware nonfree.
Legal considerations
In order for these freedoms to be real, they must be permanent andirrevocable as long as you do nothing wrong; if the developer of thesoftware has the power to revoke the license, or retroactively addrestrictions to its terms, without your doing anything wrong to givecause, the software is not free.
A free license may not require compliance with the license of anonfree program. Thus, for instance, if a license requires you tocomply with the licenses of “all the programs you use”, inthe case of a user that runs nonfree programs this would requirecompliance with the licenses of those nonfree programs; that makes thelicense nonfree.
It is acceptable for a free license to specify which jurisdiction'slaw applies, or where litigation must be done, or both.
Contract-based licenses
Most free software licenses are based on copyright, and there are limitson what kinds of requirements can be imposed through copyright. If acopyright-based license respects freedom in the ways described above, itis unlikely to have some other sort of problem that we never anticipated(though this does happen occasionally). However, some free softwarelicenses are based on contracts, and contracts can impose a much largerrange of possible restrictions. That means there are many possible wayssuch a license could be unacceptably restrictive and nonfree.
We can't possibly list all the ways that might happen. If acontract-based license restricts the user in an unusual way thatcopyright-based licenses cannot, and which isn't mentioned here aslegitimate, we will have to think about it, and we will probably concludeit is nonfree.
Use the right words when talking about free software
When talking about free software, it is best to avoid using termslike “give away” or “for free,” because those terms imply thatthe issue is about price, not freedom. Some common terms suchas “piracy” embody opinions we hope you won't endorse. See Confusing Words and Phrases thatare Worth Avoiding for a discussion of these terms. We also havea list of proper translations of“free software” into various languages.
How we interpret these criteria
Finally, note that criteria such as those stated in this free softwaredefinition require careful thought for their interpretation. To decidewhether a specific software license qualifies as a free software license,we judge it based on these criteria to determine whether it fits theirspirit as well as the precise words. If a license includes unconscionablerestrictions, we reject it, even if we did not anticipate the issuein these criteria. Sometimes a license requirement raises an issuethat calls for extensive thought, including discussions with a lawyer,before we can decide if the requirement is acceptable. When we reacha conclusion about a new issue, we often update these criteria to makeit easier to see why certain licenses do or don't qualify.
Get help with free licenses
If you are interested in whether a specific license qualifies as a freesoftware license, see our listof licenses. If the license you are concerned with is notlisted there, you can ask us about it by sending us email at <licensing@gnu.org>.
If you are contemplating writing a new license, please contact theFree Software Foundation first by writing to that address. Theproliferation of different free software licenses means increased workfor users in understanding the licenses; we may be able to help youfind an existing free software license that meets your needs.
If that isn't possible, if you really need a new license, with ourhelp you can ensure that the license really is a free software licenseand avoid various practical problems.
Beyond Software
Software manuals must be free,for the same reasons that software must be free, and because themanuals are in effect part of the software.
The same arguments also make sense for other kinds of works ofpractical use — that is to say, works that embody useful knowledge,such as educational works and referenceworks. Wikipedia is the best-knownexample.
Any kind of work can be free, and the definition of free softwarehas been extended to a definition of free cultural works applicable to any kind of works.
Open Source?
Another group uses the term “open source” to meansomething close (but not identical) to “free software”. Weprefer the term “free software” because, once you have heard thatit refers to freedom rather than price, it calls to mind freedom. Theword “open” never refers to freedom.