From 3f62cee3634feb5e05b70a8a7a9b7c86ff8c875c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: P. J. McDermott Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2011 19:31:30 -0500 Subject: Mention "false exclusionary disjunct" instead. --- (limited to 'essays') diff --git a/essays/commercial-free-software.html b/essays/commercial-free-software.html index 473c2d3..74b0922 100755 --- a/essays/commercial-free-software.html +++ b/essays/commercial-free-software.html @@ -10,9 +10,11 @@ software. They believe that "free" means "noncommercial", and they might compare "open-source" software and "commercial" software as if the terms were opposite and mutually exclusive. This is in fact a logical fallacy; - specifically it is an affirmation of a disjunct. Software can be both free - and commercial. If a software copyright license allowed only noncommercial - dealing, it would be considered neither free nor open source. + specifically it is a + false + exclusionary disjunct. Software can be both free and commercial. If a + software copyright license allowed only noncommercial dealing, it would be + considered neither free nor open source.

Free software is in fact used commercially, and successful business models -- cgit v0.9.1