[not entirely OT] proper terms for grades of freedom

[Oleg Goldshmidt]

On 6/10/10, shimi <linux-il at shimi.net> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 2:04 PM, Oleg Goldshmidt <pub at goldshmidt.org> wrote:
>>
>> Are there licenses that allow private modifications but not
>> distribution of either original or modified program?
>>
> I know of at least one, though it was not part of a Well Known License,
> rather than the license terms the guy invented by himself. The qmail MTA.
> Its author allowed redistribution

So it is not what I am looking for.

> in source code form only, and IIRC,
> without changes to the source (you had to attach patches and let end users
> do the patching artwork). Binary distribution, even of unmodified code, was
> not allowed.

That may not fit the "Open Source Definition" then, and make it
therefore "special", but not in the same sense.

> The license behind Firefox doesn't allow you to distribute a binary branded
> with the Mozilla name - might also be related to what you're looking?

Nope.

Thanks a lot, anyway,

-- 
Oleg Goldshmidt | pub at goldshmidt.org