>>>>> "h" == hartr <hartr@redhat.com> writes:
h> On 6 Aug, Craig Sanders wrote:
>> and, given that RH is also available for free download it's
>> probably even more accurate to call it semi-commercial...but if
>> you as a representative of RH want to call your product
>> "commercial", i'm not going to dispute it.
h> You are failing to grasp the point that Linux being
h> 'commercial' or not is determined by its USE; wether the
h> organisation using it paid for it or not is irrelevant.
`Commercial' always means `sold for money' when contrasted with
`proprietary'; even if that is not how you choose to use the word,
that is how I intended it when I brought up the distinction between
`commercial' and `proprietary'.
-- ///////////////// | | The spark of a pin <sneakums@zork.net> | left blank. | dropping, falling feather-like. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ | | There is too much noise.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.1 : Fri Aug 31 2001 - 03:10:03 EST