On Mon, 15 Jan 2007 23:21:52 -0500 "Jean-Daniel Beaubien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Groklaw has an article about some misconceptions of the BSD license > > http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20070114093427179 > > I am curious what people on this list (with the proper knowledge) > think about the correctnessof the article. > > Jd > The Groklaw article is complete bullshit. The BSD (and ISC) licenses are terse... I don't know how someone could misinterpret them... except unless they wanted to just write yellow journalism, which is what slashdot is all about! See /usr/share/misc/license.template You'll notice that the ONLY RESTRICTIONS amount to this: *Permission to use, copy, modify, and distribute this software for any *purpose with or without fee is hereby granted, provided that the *above copyright notice and this permission notice appear in all copies. As long as you retain the copyright notice, you're acting in the spirit of the license (give credit where it is due) and are not violating copyright law. The only difference in the 3 clause BSD license is that you can't use the name of organization XXX to promote your product. The BSD and ISC licenses are VERY short, and do not contain confusing or _ambigious_ terms like other licenses. Anyone who does not understand them is a moron. Keep it simple, stupid. Travers Buda
