From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri May 8 14:11:02 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 357281065677 for ; Fri, 8 May 2009 14:11:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from m.e.sanliturk@gmail.com) Received: from mail-fx0-f168.google.com (mail-fx0-f168.google.com [209.85.220.168]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B02EF8FC23 for ; Fri, 8 May 2009 14:11:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from m.e.sanliturk@gmail.com) Received: by fxm12 with SMTP id 12so1422000fxm.43 for ; Fri, 08 May 2009 07:11:00 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=5qMVqNngH7L2yVVYHIeFzbc8cYpQNCpJtuJeYC9U7oE=; b=fEhUd4HrUF6HXL361YthCdH8rp6klW0rFcL0MuKdoguKXsBA0TuWLTrttygYo4P1kW v3mS1VZHxjJAnp5z07XXv8QCzyjHTHUShm5r5ZkDilmib8B5GR6PxePv/4w6fOug/4KH OdahKfk0sMoF/185xB5jNSOikwEJe8GZHjMqA= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=OALy7IDY9qUSEiQOyOIEgxpPxdC3wuE71zLu5IvF+DGlRDwlW6N0q+46aFc5EZOAQF 6oPPGFObrxJrycyOK1GtLg9UWkOhU3IfKgiqfFY60hpjqwZyxSNv2LAbsQARP/qoWusk t7dmUMnAMAfZuMNThcDo3WxAoDkxNWVPKKEEs= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.204.116.212 with SMTP id n20mr3642384bkq.138.1241791860538; Fri, 08 May 2009 07:11:00 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <200905080838.20628.mike.jeays@rogers.com> References: <4A03BE9F.5050906@ibctech.ca> <200905080838.20628.mike.jeays@rogers.com> Date: Fri, 8 May 2009 10:11:00 -0400 Message-ID: From: Mehmet Erol Sanliturk To: Mike Jeays Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Licensing 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, 08 May 2009 14:11:02 -0000 On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 8:38 AM, Mike Jeays wrote: > On May 8, 2009 01:09:51 am Steve Bertrand wrote: > > I've got a question that is likely not suited for this list, but I know > > that there are people here who can guide me off-list. > > > > Being a network engineer, I'm far from a developer. With that said, I've > > written numerous network automation programs (mostly in Perl), and have > > developed several small patches for software written in C related to ISP > > operations (including the OS itself). > > > > I'm looking for advice on how I can take all of my code, and license it > > into the public domain. I'm sure that most people won't have any > > interest in it, but I really want to ensure that what I have done is > > freely accessible. > > > > All of my code is pretty well separated into different files that > > contain different functions, so isolating portions of my programs that > > use modules or functions that are external is not a problem. > > > > GPL seems too verbose legally for me. Can the BSD license fit into any > > code, no matter what language it is in, and if so, can I have my code > > overlooked by someone who can verify that the BSD license will fit? > > > > Steve > > > > > I would keep away from the term 'public domain', which means you would lose > any rights to it whatsoever. Public Domain does NOT invalidate Copyright : The owner of the work is the copyright holder . Public Domain is a license kind which means that there is no any condition on the usage . For example , BSD-style licenses generally are mentioned as 2-clause ( conditions ) , 3-clause ( conditions ) , etc. . Public Domain license means Zero-clause license . > > I don't think the language makes any difference. Basically, the BSD license > is > OK if you don't mind others taking the code, modifying it and distributing > binaries without making the modified source available. If you don't like > the > last part, consider the GPL. > > Language and used libraries sometimes may cause problems for the users of the sources when they want to distribute executables . For example , if a BSD-style licensed source uses GPL parts as called procedures , NOT the users of the both sources have any restriction , but when executable is distributed to others , BSD-style licensed sources also should be distributed due to GPL conditions although BSD-styled licensed part itself does not require distribution . My opinion is that most restrictive license is GPL although it is claimed that it gives freedom to users to get the source and modify it when they need . One point is forgotten or ignored : A BSD-style licensed source is also available from its originators whether it is distributed by its users or not . Thank you very much . Mehmet Erol Sanliturk