From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Mar 13 04:28:49 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDA43106566B for ; Fri, 13 Mar 2009 04:28:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from nslay@comcast.net) Received: from QMTA01.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net (qmta01.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net [76.96.62.16]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9543E8FC0C for ; Fri, 13 Mar 2009 04:28:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from nslay@comcast.net) Received: from OMTA03.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.62.27]) by QMTA01.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id SUE41b0020bG4ec51UFahd; Fri, 13 Mar 2009 04:15:34 +0000 Received: from LIGHTBULB.LOCAL ([68.35.224.189]) by OMTA03.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id SUF21b00145o48c3PUF2o6; Fri, 13 Mar 2009 04:15:03 +0000 Message-ID: <49B9DD9B.2070606@comcast.net> Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2009 00:14:19 -0400 From: Nathan Lay User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (X11/20090128) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Polytropon References: <20090311012018.2075c3d9@gom.home> <20090311140247.GE86605@Grumpy.DynDNS.org> <20090311154613.0a90e64b.freebsd@edvax.de> In-Reply-To: <20090311154613.0a90e64b.freebsd@edvax.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: David Kelly , FreeBSD-Questions@freebsd.org, prad Subject: Re: bsd vs gpl X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2009 04:28:50 -0000 Polytropon wrote: > I'd like to make an addition: > > The freedom of the BSDL intentionally allows to close sources. > This can be considered theft, if one would like to use this > interpretation. When taking some BSDL code, there's no need > to contribute anything back. > > One argument could be that the money or hardware given to the > FreeBSD developers is "abused" by those who "silently" take > advantage of their work. > > But finally, it's always the developer who decides what to do > with his own work. If he intends to allow others to make money > from his code without giving anything back, it's his choice to > do so. If a supporter doesn't like this decision, he should > think about his support. > > Closing code doesn't make the code disappear which it is based > upon, so code doesn't get "unfree". > > > > I know, this can lead into an endless discussion. It has already > taken place on other platforms, such as here: > > http://www.osnews.com/comments/20740 > > Forgive me my comment. :-) > Often overlooked, but the open nature of the BSD license and similar contribute to the adoption and widespread use technology by industry. I wager that if software like Xorg, the BSD IP stack, and etc... were licensed under GPL or similar restrictive licenses, these technologies might not have lasted. Open (in the BSDL sense) technology seems to do better in the long run... Ironic? Best Regards, Nathan Lay