first

1 files changed, 404 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/docs/categories.md b/docs/categories.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..465f384
--- /dev/null
+++ b/docs/categories.md
@@ -0,0 +1,404 @@
+---
+Generator: 'texi2html 1.82'
+description: Untitled Document
+distribution: global
+keywords: Untitled Document
+resource-type: document
+title: Untitled Document
+...
+
+1. Categories of Free and Nonfree Software {#categories-of-free-and-nonfree-software .chapter}
+==========================================
+
+@firstcopyingnotice{{ See also “Words to Avoid (or Use with Care)
+Because They Are Loaded or Confusing” (@pageref{Words to Avoid}).
+@medskip @footnoterule @smallskip Copyright © 1996–1998, 2001, 2006,
+2007, 2009, 2011, 2012, 2014, 2015 Free Software Foundation, Inc.\
+ {This list was originally published on <http://gnu.org>, in 1996. This
+version is part of @fsfsthreecite}
+
+![category](category.jpg)
+
+> *This diagram, originally by Chao-Kuei and updated by several others
+> since, explains the different categories of software. It’s available
+> as a Scalable Vector Graphic, at
+> <http://gnu.org/philosophy/category.svg>, and as an XFig document, at
+> <http://gnu.org/philosophy/category.fig>, under the terms of any of
+> the GNU GPL v2-or-later, the GNU FDL v1.2-or-later, or the Creative
+> Commons Attribution-Share Alike v2.0-or-later.*
+
+### Free Software {#free-software .subheading}
+
+Free software is software that comes with permission for anyone to use,
+copy, and/or distribute, either verbatim or with modifications, either
+gratis or for a fee. In particular, this means that source code must be
+available. “If it’s not source, it’s not software.” This is a simplified
+description; see also the full definition, on @pageref{Definition}.
+
+If a program is free, then it can potentially be included in a free
+operating system such as GNU, or free versions of the GNU/Linux
+system.[(1)](#FOOT1)
+
+There are many different ways to make a program free—many questions of
+detail, which could be decided in more than one way and still make the
+program free. Some of the possible variations are described below. For
+information on specific free software licenses, see the license list
+page, at <http://gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html>.
+
+Free software is a matter of freedom, not price. But proprietary
+software companies typically use the term “free software” to refer to
+price. Sometimes they mean that you can obtain a binary copy at no
+charge; sometimes they mean that a copy is bundled with a computer that
+you are buying, and the price includes both. Either way, it has nothing
+to do with what we mean by free software in the GNU Project.
+
+Because of this potential confusion, when a software company says its
+product is free software, always check the actual distribution terms to
+see whether users really have all the freedoms that free software
+implies. Sometimes it really is free software; sometimes it isn’t.
+
+Many languages have two separate words for “free” as in freedom and
+“free” as in zero price. For example, French has “libre” and “gratuit.”
+Not so English; there is a word “gratis” that refers unambiguously to
+price, but no common adjective that refers unambiguously to freedom. So
+if you are speaking another language, we suggest you translate “free”
+into your language to make it clearer. See our list of translations of
+the term “free software” into various other languages (@pageref{Appendix
+B}).
+
+Free software is often more reliable than nonfree software.[(2)](#FOOT2)
+
+### Open Source Software {#open-source-software .subheading}
+
+The term “open source” software is used by some people to mean more or
+less the same category as free software. It is not exactly the same
+class of software: they accept some licenses that we consider too
+restrictive, and there are free software licenses they have not
+accepted. However, the differences in extension of the category are
+small: nearly all free software is open source, and nearly all open
+source software is free.
+
+We prefer the term “free software” because it refers to
+freedom—something that the term “open source” does not do.[(3)](#FOOT3)
+
+### Public Domain Software {#public-domain-software .subheading}
+
+Public domain software is software that is not copyrighted. If the
+source code is in the public domain, that is a special case of
+noncopylefted free software, which means that some copies or modified
+versions may not be free at all.
+
+In some cases, an executable program can be in the public domain but the
+source code is not available. This is not free software, because free
+software requires accessibility of source code. Meanwhile, most free
+software is not in the public domain; it is copyrighted, and the
+copyright holders have legally given permission for everyone to use it
+in freedom, using a free software license.
+
+Sometimes people use the term “public domain” in a loose fashion to mean
+“free” or “available gratis.” However, “public domain” is a legal term
+and means, precisely, “not copyrighted.” For clarity, we recommend using
+“public domain” for that meaning only, and using other terms to convey
+the other meanings.
+
+Under the Berne Convention, which most countries have signed, anything
+written down is automatically copyrighted. This includes programs.
+Therefore, if you want a program you have written to be in the public
+domain, you must take some legal steps to disclaim the copyright on it;
+otherwise, the program is copyrighted.
+
+### Copylefted Software {#copylefted-software .subheading}
+
+Copylefted software is free software whose distribution terms ensure
+that all copies of all versions carry more or less the same distribution
+terms. This means, for instance, that copyleft licenses generally
+disallow others to add additional requirements to the software (though a
+limited set of safe added requirements can be allowed) and require
+making source code available. This shields the program, and its modified
+versions, from some of the common ways of making a program proprietary.
+
+Some copyleft licenses, such as GPL version 3, block other means of
+turning software proprietary, such as tivoization.[(4)](#FOOT4)
+
+In the GNU Project, we copyleft almost all the software we write,
+because our goal is to give *every* user the freedoms implied by the
+term “free software.” See our copyleft article (@pageref{Copyleft}) for
+more explanation of how copyleft works and why we use it.
+
+Copyleft is a general concept; to copyleft an actual program, you need
+to use a specific set of distribution terms. There are many possible
+ways to write copyleft distribution terms, so in principle there can be
+many copyleft free software licenses. However, in actual practice nearly
+all copylefted software uses the GNU General Public License. Two
+different copyleft licenses are usually “incompatible,” which means it
+is illegal to merge the code using one license with the code using the
+other license; therefore, it is good for the community if people use a
+single copyleft license.
+
+### Noncopylefted Free Software {#noncopylefted-free-software .subheading}
+
+Noncopylefted free software comes from the author with permission to
+redistribute and modify, and also to add additional restrictions to it.
+
+If a program is free but not copylefted, then some copies or modified
+versions may not be free at all. A software company can compile the
+program, with or without modifications, and distribute the executable
+file as a proprietary software product.
+
+The X Window System illustrates this. The X Consortium released X11 with
+distribution terms that made it noncopylefted free software, and
+subsequent developers have mostly followed the same practice. A copy
+which has those distribution terms is free software. However, there are
+nonfree versions as well, and there are (or at least were) popular
+workstations and PC graphics boards for which nonfree versions are the
+only ones that work. If you are using this hardware, X11 is not free
+software for you. The developers of X11 even made X11 nonfree for a
+while;[(5)](#FOOT5) they were able to do this because others had
+contributed their code under the same noncopyleft license.
+
+### Lax Permissive Licensed Software {#lax-permissive-licensed-software .subheading}
+
+Lax permissive licenses include the X11 license and the two BSD
+licenses.[(6)](#FOOT6) These licenses permit almost any use of the code,
+including distributing proprietary binaries with or without changing the
+source code.
+
+### GPL-Covered Software {#gpl-covered-software .subheading}
+
+The GNU GPL (General Public License) is one specific set of distribution
+terms for copylefting a program. The GNU Project uses it as the
+distribution terms for most GNU software.
+
+To equate free software with GPL-covered software is therefore an error.
+
+### The GNU Operating System {#the-gnu-operating-system .subheading}
+
+The GNU operating system is the Unix-like operating system, which is
+entirely free software, that we in the GNU Project have developed since
+1984.[(7)](#FOOT7)
+
+A Unix-like operating system consists of many programs. The GNU system
+includes all of the official GNU packages. It also includes many other
+packages, such as the X Window System and TeX, which are not GNU
+software.
+
+The first test release of the complete GNU system was in 1996. This
+includes the GNU Hurd, our kernel, developed since 1990. In 2001 the GNU
+system (including the GNU Hurd) began working fairly reliably, but the
+Hurd still lacks some important features, so it is not widely used.
+Meanwhile, the GNU/Linux system, an offshoot of the GNU operating system
+which uses Linux as the kernel instead of the GNU Hurd, has been a great
+success since the 90s.[(8)](#FOOT8) As this shows, the GNU system is not
+a single static set of programs; users and distributors may select
+different packages according to their needs and desires. The result is
+still a variant of the GNU system.
+
+Since the purpose of GNU is to be free, every single component in the
+GNU operating system is free software. They don’t all have to be
+copylefted, however; any kind of free software is legally suitable to
+include if it helps meet technical goals.
+
+### GNU Programs {#gnu-programs .subheading}
+
+“GNU programs” is equivalent to GNU software. A program Foo is a GNU
+program if it is GNU software. We also sometimes say it is a “GNU
+package.”
+
+### GNU Software {#gnu-software .subheading}
+
+“GNU software” is software that is released under the auspices of the
+GNU Project.[(9)](#FOOT9) If a program is GNU software, we also say that
+it is a GNU program or a GNU package. The README or manual of a GNU
+package should say it is one; also, the Free Software
+Directory[(10)](#FOOT10) identifies all GNU packages.
+
+Most GNU software is copylefted, but not all; however, all GNU software
+must be free software.
+
+Some GNU software was written by staff of the Free Software Foundation,
+but most GNU software comes from many volunteers.[(11)](#FOOT11) (Some
+of these volunteers are paid by companies or universities, but they are
+volunteers for us.) Some contributed software is copyrighted by the Free
+Software Foundation; some is copyrighted by the contributors who wrote
+it.
+
+### FSF-Copyrighted GNU Software {#fsf-copyrighted-gnu-software .subheading}
+
+The developers of GNU packages can transfer the copyright to the FSF, or
+they can keep it. The choice is theirs.
+
+If they have transferred the copyright to the FSF, the program is
+FSF-copyrighted GNU software, and the FSF can enforce its license. If
+they have kept the copyright, enforcing the license is their
+responsibility.
+
+The FSF does not accept copyright assignments of software that is not an
+official GNU package, as a rule.
+
+### Nonfree Software {#nonfree-software .subheading}
+
+Nonfree software is any software that is not free. Its use,
+redistribution or modification is prohibited, or requires you to ask for
+permission, or is restricted so much that you effectively can’t do it
+freely.
+
+### Proprietary Software {#proprietary-software .subheading}
+
+Proprietary software is another name for nonfree software. In the past
+we subdivided nonfree software into “semifree software,” which could be
+modified and redistributed noncommercially, and “proprietary software,”
+which could not be. But we have dropped that distinction and now use
+“proprietary software” as synonymous with nonfree software.
+
+The Free Software Foundation follows the rule that we cannot install any
+proprietary program on our computers except temporarily for the specific
+purpose of writing a free replacement for that very program. Aside from
+that, we feel there is no possible excuse for installing a proprietary
+program.
+
+For example, we felt justified in installing Unix on our computer in the
+1980s, because we were using it to write a free replacement for Unix.
+Nowadays, since free operating systems are available, the excuse is no
+longer applicable; we do not use any nonfree operating systems, and any
+new computer we install must run a completely free operating system.
+
+We don’t insist that users of GNU, or contributors to GNU, have to live
+by this rule. It is a rule we made for ourselves. But we hope you will
+follow it too, for your freedom’s sake.
+
+### Freeware {#freeware .subheading}
+
+The term “freeware” has no clear accepted definition, but it is commonly
+used for packages which permit redistribution but not modification (and
+their source code is not available). These packages are *not* free
+software, so please don’t use “freeware” to refer to free software.
+
+### Shareware {#shareware .subheading}
+
+Shareware is software which comes with permission for people to
+redistribute copies, but says that anyone who continues to use a copy is
+*required* to pay a license fee.
+
+Shareware is not free software, or even semifree. There are two reasons
+it is not:
+
+-   For most shareware, source code is not available; thus, you cannot
+    modify the program at all.
+-   Shareware does not come with permission to make a copy and install
+    it without paying a license fee, not even for individuals engaging
+    in nonprofit activity. (In practice, people often disregard the
+    distribution terms and do this anyway, but the terms don’t
+    permit it.)
+
+### Private software {#private-software .subheading}
+
+Private or custom software is software developed for one user (typically
+an organization or company). That user keeps it and uses it, and does
+not release it to the public either as source code or as binaries.
+
+A private program is free software (in a somewhat trivial sense) if its
+sole user has the four freedoms. In particular, if the user has full
+rights to the private program, the program is free. However, if the user
+distributes copies to others and does not provide the four freedoms with
+those copies, those copies are not free software.
+
+Free software is a matter of freedom, not access. In general we do not
+believe it is wrong to develop a program and not release it. There are
+occasions when a program is so important that one might argue that
+withholding it from the public is doing wrong to humanity. However, such
+cases are rare. Most programs are not that important, and declining to
+release them is not particularly wrong. Thus, there is no conflict
+between the development of private or custom software and the principles
+of the free software movement.
+
+Nearly all employment for programmers is in development of custom
+software; therefore most programming jobs are, or could be, done in a
+way compatible with the free software movement.
+
+### Commercial Software {#commercial-software .subheading}
+
+“Commercial” and “proprietary” are not the same! Commercial software is
+software developed by a business as part of its business. Most
+commercial software is proprietary, but there is commercial free
+software, and there is noncommercial nonfree software.
+
+For example, GNU Ada is developed by a company. It is always distributed
+under the terms of the GNU GPL, and every copy is free software; but its
+developers sell support contracts. When their salesmen speak to
+prospective customers, sometimes the customers say, “We would feel safer
+with a commercial compiler.” The salesmen reply, “GNU Ada *is* a
+commercial compiler; it happens to be free software.” For the GNU
+Project, the priorities are in the other order: the important thing is
+that GNU Ada is free software; that it is commercial is just a detail.
+However, the additional development of GNU Ada that results from its
+being commercial is definitely beneficial. Please help spread the
+awareness that free commercial software is possible. You can do this by
+making an effort not to say “commercial” when you mean “proprietary.”
+
+<div class="footnote">
+
+------------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+### Footnotes
+
+### [(1)](#DOCF1)
+
+@raggedright See “Linux and the GNU System” (@pageref{Linux and GNU})
+for more information. @end raggedright
+
+### [(2)](#DOCF2)
+
+@raggedright See “Free Software Is More Reliable!” at\
+ <http://gnu.org/software/reliability.html>. @end raggedright
+
+### [(3)](#DOCF3)
+
+@raggedright See “Why Open Source Misses the Point of Free Software”
+(@pageref{OS Misses Point}). @end raggedright
+
+### [(4)](#DOCF4)
+
+@raggedright See “Why Upgrade to GPLv3” (@pageref{Why V3}) for more on
+this. @end raggedright
+
+### [(5)](#DOCF5)
+
+@raggedright See “The X Window System Trap” (@pageref{X}). @end
+raggedright
+
+### [(6)](#DOCF6)
+
+@raggedright See “The BSD License Problem,” at
+<http://gnu.org/philosophy/bsd.html>. @end raggedright
+
+### [(7)](#DOCF7)
+
+@raggedright See “Overview of the GNU System,” at
+<http://gnu.org/gnu/gnu-history.html>, for more historical background.
+@end raggedright
+
+### [(8)](#DOCF8)
+
+@raggedright See “Linux and the GNU System” (@pageref{Linux and GNU})
+for more information. @end raggedright
+
+### [(9)](#DOCF9)
+
+@raggedright See “Overview of the GNU System,” at
+<http://gnu.org/gnu/gnu-history.html>, for more historical background.
+@end raggedright
+
+### [(10)](#DOCF10)
+
+@raggedright See <http://directory.fsf.org>. @end raggedright
+
+### [(11)](#DOCF11)
+
+@raggedright See <http://gnu.org/people/people.html>. @end raggedright
+
+</div>
+
+------------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+This document was generated by *tonghuix* on *March 25, 2016* using
+[*texi2html 1.82*](http://www.nongnu.org/texi2html/).\