would someone kindly clarify this paragaph, please (RH business model)

[Robert P. J. Day]

On Mon, 27 Oct 2003, Mike A. Harris wrote:

> On Mon, 27 Oct 2003, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> 
> >> The truth of the matter is, that open source software is ALWAYS 
> >> "free" in any definition of the word.  Even when you *pay* for 
> >> OSS, you have the option of obtaining it at no cost via download 
> >> if you desire in source code form at a bare minimum.
> >...
> >
> >say what?  i'm not convinced.  what if i start a company and write
> >a completely proprietary piece of software, with license fees and
> >per-seat restrictions and everything?  i might decide, for better
> >or worse, to open source that product, and yet it would still be
> >proprietary and non-free.
> 
> Wrong.  That is not open source.  That is "source code
> available", like pine or qmail or something else.  The definition 
> of "open source" is software under a license that is approved by 
> OSI, of which the appropriate licenses are located at:
> 
> 	http://www.opensource.org

ok, i see the distinction.  i didn't realize that you were using
the phrase "open source" in that official capacity.

rday