[not entirely OT] proper terms for grades of freedom

[Oleg Goldshmidt]

On 6/10/10, Tzafrir Cohen <tzafrir at cohens.org.il> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 02:04:29PM +0300, Oleg Goldshmidt wrote:
>
>> Is there an "official" term for software that comes with source code
>> but does not allow one to modify or distribute it (modified or not)?
>> [This was the original question that fueled my curiosity.]
>
> By giving up any of those freedoms, it means you give up on using free
> software.

I know. The terms I am asking about will most definitely not
classified as either free or open source SW. The subject of my
friend's email to me was "not open source software" ;-).

>> Are there licenses that provide the code but do not allow (even
>> private) modifications?
>
> http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/
> http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/

Yes, but both allow distribution, so they didn't fit because of that.

> Sure. What you want is certainly not close to being free software. You
> need not bother looking there.

I did not look specifically for free/open source. I looked for license
comparison lists hoping to find examples (that would not be FOSS).

Finally, I did mark the post OT, I posted the question here because
this is a place where there are people very well versed in the
subject.

-- 
Oleg Goldshmidt | oleg at goldshmidt.org