Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 26 Feb 2001 11:13:19 -0800
From:      David Johnson <djohnson@acuson.com>
To:        Ted Mittelstaedt <tedm@toybox.placo.com>
Cc:        freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Stallman stalls again
Message-ID:  <3A9AAACF.8FBF2721@acuson.com>
References:  <002201c09f0a$2b5d5480$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
> 
> I think the premise of BSD is that it is the minimum that
> the law requires to prevent the University of California
> from being sued for providing faulty software. :-)

But the original post was asking why people *use* the BSD license. This
has nothing whatsoever to do with why it was created. Some people still
use it as a CYA license. Others have a philosophical bent towards public
domain, but still want to CYA. Some use it because it is more "Free" in
the Stallman sense than the GPL. And a few people use it simply because
Stallman prefers that they don't.

But most people don't "choose" a license, they simply use what is
expected of them. If they think that they're supposed to use the GPL
then that is what they will use. This is why most Open Source developers
use the GPL, because only GNU has any sort of license PR. If you look at
the KDE developers you will find a great diversity of licenses because
they were forced by the silly Qt controversy to actually think about the
licenses they were using. 

David

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3A9AAACF.8FBF2721>