On Dec 14, 2007 8:51 PM, Benjamin M. A'Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If you use a BSD licence, you are allowing your code to be included in a > proprietary application under a proprietary licence, and there is no > requirement for your parts of the source to be distributed under the BSD > licence by the proprietary developers. > > If you use a BSD licence, you are allowing your code to be included in a > free application under the GNU General Public Licence, and there is no > requirement for your parts of the source to be distributed under the BSD > licence by the GPL-software developers.
Theo actually made a very good point on this a couple of months back, during the whole "lets relicense reyk's code" fiasco. He showed how Microsoft remained compliant with the license when it re-releases bsd code, but how GPL'ing the code violated both the spirit *AND* the letter of the law. The OpenBSD folks really do understand licensing, and put forth a lot of energy in making sure their stuff is fully compliant to licensing (witness the removal of ipf, the creation of openssh, etc). -- http://www.glumbert.com/media/shift http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGvHNNOLnCk "This officer's men seem to follow him merely out of idle curiosity." -- Sandhurst officer cadet evaluation. "Securing an environment of Windows platforms from abuse - external or internal - is akin to trying to install sprinklers in a fireworks factory where smoking on the job is permitted." -- Gene Spafford learn french: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j1G-3laJJP0&feature=related
