Free

Rodgers and Kirke toured again with Bad Company from to Andy Fraser died on 16 March From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Classic line-up Paul Rodgers — lead vocals —, — , keyboards, piano , — , guitar Paul Kossoff died — guitar —, — Andy Fraser died — bass guitar —, , keyboards, piano — Simon Kirke — drums, percussion —, — Later members John "Rabbit" Bundrick — keyboards, piano , Tetsu Yamauchi — bass guitar — Wendell Richardson — guitar Retrieved 21 July Rock Obituaries — Knocking on Heaven's Door. Legends of Rock Guitar: Retrieved 18 April Retrieved 9 July Retrieved 15 January Retrieved 20 October Archived from the original on 8 August Retrieved 25 August Free — Live at the BBC.

Anthology Rock 'N' Roll Fantasy: The Very Best of Bad Company.

Retrieved from " https: Views Read Edit View history. In other projects Wikimedia Commons. This page was last edited on 15 December , at By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.

Blues rock , hard rock. Classic line-up Paul Rodgers — lead vocals —, — , keyboards, piano , — , guitar Paul Kossoff died — guitar —, — Andy Fraser died — bass guitar —, , keyboards, piano — Simon Kirke — drums, percussion —, — Later members John "Rabbit" Bundrick — keyboards, piano , Tetsu Yamauchi — bass guitar — Wendell Richardson — guitar However, a license that requires modified versions to be nonfree does not qualify as a free license. The freedom to redistribute copies must include binary or executable forms of the program, as well as source code, for both modified and unmodified versions.

Distributing programs in runnable form is necessary for conveniently installable free operating systems.

• What is free software? - GNU Project - Free Software Foundation!
• Hey, Diddle Diddle--Blood is the Riddle.
• Free | Products.
• Ameripeans.

It is OK if there is no way to produce a binary or executable form for a certain program since some languages don't support that feature , but you must have the freedom to redistribute such forms should you find or develop a way to make them. Certain kinds of rules about the manner of distributing free software are acceptable, when they don't conflict with the central freedoms. For example, copyleft very simply stated is the rule that when redistributing the program, you cannot add restrictions to deny other people the central freedoms. This rule does not conflict with the central freedoms; rather it protects them.

In the GNU project, we use copyleft to protect the four freedoms legally for everyone. We believe there are important reasons why it is better to use copyleft. However, noncopylefted free software is ethical too. 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. Thus, it is acceptable for the license to require that you change the name of the modified version, remove a logo, or identify your modifications as yours. As long as these requirements are not so burdensome that they effectively hamper you from releasing your changes, they are acceptable; you're already making other changes to the program, so you won't have trouble making a few more.

An example of such an acceptable rule is one saying that if you have distributed a modified version and a previous developer asks for a copy of it, you must send one. Note that such a rule still leaves you the choice of whether to distribute 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. A special issue arises when a license requires changing the name by which the program will be invoked from other programs. That effectively hampers you from releasing your changed version so that it can replace the original when invoked by those other programs.

This sort of requirement is acceptable only if there's a suitable aliasing facility that allows you to specify the original program's name as an alias for the modified version.

Free (band) - Wikipedia

Sometimes government export control regulations and trade sanctions can constrain your freedom to distribute copies of programs internationally. Software developers do not have the power to eliminate or override these restrictions, but what they can and must do is refuse to impose them as conditions of use of the program. In this way, the restrictions will not affect activities and people outside the jurisdictions of these governments.

Thus, free software licenses must not require obedience to any nontrivial export regulations as a condition of exercising any of the essential freedoms. Merely mentioning the existence of export regulations, without making them a condition of the license itself, is acceptable since it does not restrict users.

{{categoryCaption}}

If an export regulation is actually trivial for free software, then requiring it as a condition is not an actual problem; however, it is a potential problem, since a later change in export law could make the requirement nontrivial and thus render the software nonfree. In order for these freedoms to be real, they must be permanent and irrevocable as long as you do nothing wrong; if the developer of the software has the power to revoke the license, or retroactively add restrictions to its terms, without your doing anything wrong to give cause, the software is not free.

A free license may not require compliance with the license of a nonfree program. It is acceptable for a free license to specify which jurisdiction's law applies, or where litigation must be done, or both. Most free software licenses are based on copyright, and there are limits on what kinds of requirements can be imposed through copyright. If a copyright-based license respects freedom in the ways described above, it is unlikely to have some other sort of problem that we never anticipated though this does happen occasionally.

However, some free software licenses are based on contracts, and contracts can impose a much larger range of possible restrictions. That means there are many possible ways such a license could be unacceptably restrictive and nonfree. We can't possibly list all the ways that might happen. If a contract-based license restricts the user in an unusual way that copyright-based licenses cannot, and which isn't mentioned here as legitimate, we will have to think about it, and we will probably conclude it is nonfree.

Finally, note that criteria such as those stated in this free software definition require careful thought for their interpretation. To decide whether a specific software license qualifies as a free software license, we judge it based on these criteria to determine whether it fits their spirit as well as the precise words.

If a license includes unconscionable restrictions, we reject it, even if we did not anticipate the issue in these criteria. Sometimes a license requirement raises an issue that calls for extensive thought, including discussions with a lawyer, before we can decide if the requirement is acceptable. When we reach a conclusion about a new issue, we often update these criteria to make it easier to see why certain licenses do or don't qualify.

If you are interested in whether a specific license qualifies as a free software license, see our list of licenses. If you are contemplating writing a new license, please contact the Free Software Foundation first by writing to that address. The proliferation of different free software licenses means increased work for users in understanding the licenses; we may be able to help you find an existing free software license that meets your needs. If that isn't possible, if you really need a new license, with our help you can ensure that the license really is a free software license and avoid various practical problems.

Launch your developer career

Software manuals must be free , for the same reasons that software must be free, and because the manuals are in effect part of the software. The same arguments also make sense for other kinds of works of practical use — that is to say, works that embody useful knowledge, such as educational works and reference works. Wikipedia is the best-known example. Any kind of work can be free, and the definition of free software has been extended to a definition of free cultural works applicable to any kind of works. From time to time we revise this Free Software Definition.

• Away From My Mothers Watchful Eye: ...a coming of age story;
• What is free software?.
• Anime morte (Universale economica. I classici) (Italian Edition);
• Free - Wikipedia?
• NEW PRODUCTS;

Here is the list of substantive changes, along with links to show exactly what was changed.