Free


By November of that year, having been given the name Free by Alexis Korner , they had recorded their first album, titled Tons of Sobs , for Island Records and, although it was not released until the following year, the album documents their first six months together and contains studio renditions of much of their early live set. He was immediately impressed and asked if he could jam with Rodgers onstage. Along with Kirke, they began the search for a fourth member. Korner also provided the name "Free" to the newly formed band.

Free (band)

Unlike their previous albums, Tons of Sobs and Free , their album Fire and Water , released in , was a huge success largely due to its hit single " All Right Now ", which reached No. S charts, making it the most successful Free album. Highway was their fourth studio album, recorded extremely quickly in September Highway performed poorly in the charts, reaching No.

In , due to differences between singer Paul Rodgers and bassist Andy Fraser, the drug problems of guitarist Paul Kossoff, and inconsistent record sales, the band temporarily disbanded. In early the band set aside their differences and reformed in an effort to save Kossoff from his growing drug addiction, and released Free at Last in June of the same year. Bassist Andy Fraser left the band in mid due to Paul Kossoff's unreliability in being able to perform at shows or even showing up. The remaining members recruited Japanese bass player Tetsu Yamauchi and keyboardist John "Rabbit" Bundrick , who had worked with Kossoff and Kirke during Free's initial split, recording Kossoff, Kirke, Tetsu and Rabbit [18] and recorded what would be Free's final album, Heartbreaker.

Launch free software to new frontiers!

Kossoff was replaced by ex- Osibisa guitarist Wendell Richardson for a USA tour in , but shortly thereafter, Free disbanded for good, with Rodgers and Kirke going on to form Bad Company [19] that same year. With Kossoff in better health again in late , he was delighted that ex-colleagues Rodgers and Kirke asked him to join them on stage for two nights.

NEW PRODUCTS

Découvrez les nouvelles Freebox One et Freebox Delta, disponibles dès maintenant. Offres Internet ADSL2+, VDSL 2 ou Fibre optique, Téléphone et Télévision. Free were an English rock band formed in London in , best known for their signature song "All Right Now". They disbanded in and lead singer.

A British tour was set to begin on 25 April with Back Street Crawler headlining with Bad Company in support of Back Street Crawler's second album, but again Kossoff's drug addictions contributed to a drastic decline in the guitarist's health. Rodgers also performed Free and Bad Company songs whilst on tour with Queen, in addition to the traditional Queen songs and new cuts from their most recently released album. 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 Distributing programs in runnable form is necessary for conveniently installable free operating systems. 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.

Launch your developer career

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.

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.

  • Front Page — Free Software Foundation — working together for free software?
  • Learn to code for free.!
  • As featured in:?
  • The First and Best Buddhist Teachings;
  • Take Action.
  • Labyrinth aus Problemen (German Edition).

Merely mentioning the existence of export regulations, without making them a condition of the license itself, is acceptable since it does not restrict users. 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.

  1. Navigation menu.
  2. {{categoryCaption}}!
  3. The Strangeling.
  4. Découvrez Freebox Delta.
  5. Raw Amateur Models: Sherri, Vol. 1, Bondage BDSM S&M Naked and Nude Tits, Boobs, and Breasts Glamour Model Photos.

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. 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.

Recent FAQs

The nonfree program controls the users, and the developer controls the program; this makes the program an instrument of unjust power. 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. These binaries are not free software even if the source code they are compiled from is free. Retrieved 21 July Distributing programs in runnable form is necessary for conveniently installable free operating systems.

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. Here is the list of substantive changes, along with links to show exactly what was changed. There are gaps in the version numbers shown above because there are other changes in this page that do not affect the definition or its interpretations.

For instance, the list does not include changes in asides, formatting, spelling, punctuation, or other parts of the page.