# 如何使用开源

## 开源就是免费？

The freedom to run the program, for any purpose (freedom 0). The freedom to study how the program works, and change it to make it do what you wish (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 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. 不论目的为何，有使用该软件的自由（自由之零）。 有研究该软件如何运作的自由，并且得以改写该软件来符合使用者自身的需求（自由之一）。取得该软件之源码为达成此目的之前提。 有重新散布该软件的自由，所以每个人都可以藉由散布自由软件来敦亲睦邻（自由之二）。 有改善再利用该软件的自由，并且可以发表改写版供公众使用，如此一来，整个社群都可以受惠。如前项，取得该软件之源码为达成此目的之前提（自由之三）。

Free software does not mean noncommercial. A free program must be available for commercial use, commercial development, and commercial distribution. Commercial development of free software is no longer unusual; such free commercial software is very important. You may have paid money to get copies of free software, or you may have obtained 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.自由软件因此并不是「非商业软件」。自由软件必须适用於商业用途。自由软件的商业开发模式已很常见；这样的自由商业软件相当重要。使用者可以付费取得 GNU 的软件，或者，使用者也可以免费取得这些软件，但是，不管使用者是如何取得这些软件的，她／他们必须永远有权利复制或是改写这些软件，甚至 贩售 这些软件。

When talking about free software, it is best to avoid using terms like give away or for free, because those terms imply that the issue is about price, not freedom. Some common terms such as piracy embody opinions we hope you won't endorse. See Confusing Words and Phrases that are Worth Avoiding for a discussion of these terms. We also have a list of proper translations of free software into various languages.当谈到自由软件时，最好避免使用「给」或是「免费」这类的措辞，因为这些措辞会给人给人「free」是指「价格上的免费」的误导，而忽略了使用软件自由的真义。有些词语像 「盗版」就有类似的涵义，我们希望自由软件的使用者不会想被这样指称。有关讨论这些措辞的用法，详见 「容易混淆的词语，请尽量避免」 一文，我们也有 「自由软件一词的翻译」 的多种语言版本。

## 开源的代码随便用？

However, rules about how to package a modified version are acceptable, if they don't substantively limit your freedom to release modified versions, or your freedom to make and use modified versions privately. Rules that if you make your version available in this way, you must make it available in that way also can be acceptable too, on the same condition. (Note that such a rule still leaves you the choice of whether to publish your version at all.) Rules that require release of source code to the users for versions that you put into public use are also acceptable. It is also acceptable for the license to require that you identify your modifications as yours, or that, if you have distributed a modified version and a previous developer asks for a copy of it, you must send one.

### GNU General Public License (GPL)

Another threat that GPLv3 resists is that of patent deals like the Novell-Microsoft pact. Microsoft wants to use its thousands of patents to make users pay Microsoft for the privilege of running GNU/Linux, and made this pact to try to achieve that. The deal offers rather limited protection from Microsoft patents to Novell's customers.Microsoft made a few mistakes in the Novell-Microsoft deal, and GPLv3 is designed to turn them against Microsoft, extending that limited patent protection to the whole community. In order to take advantage of this protection, programs need to use GPLv3.Microsoft's lawyers are not stupid, and next time they may manage to avoid those mistakes. GPLv3 therefore says they don't get a “next time”. Releasing a program under GPL version 3 protects it from Microsoft's future attempts to make redistributors collect Microsoft royalties from the program's users.

### GNU Lesser General Public License (LGPL)

posted @ 2010-02-02 10:09  Jake Lin  阅读(8866)  评论(18编辑  收藏  举报