Date: Sat, 20 Feb 1999 09:11:12 -0600 From: "Richard E. Hawkins" <hawk@eyry.econ.iastate.edu> To: "K. Marsh" <durang@u.washington.edu> Cc: Simon J Mudd <sjmudd@bitmailer.net>, freebsd-newbies@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Very Common Question Message-ID: <199902201511.JAA43134@eyry.econ.iastate.edu> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 20 Feb 1999 12:40:01 PST." <Pine.A41.4.05.9902201235570.14710-100000@goodall1.u.washington.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Kenneth Marsh wrote, > On 20 Feb 1999, Simon J Mudd wrote: > > I'm not too sure of the licensing situation with FreeBSD, although > > from the comments I think it's not GPL. this may be an issue for some > > people: I'm not sure. > I think the main concept behind the FreeBSD liscense is that they don't > want to force people to distribute source code for a product they've made > using FreeBSD in part or in whole. This enables you to modify the code > however you want and then sell it for profit. By the regular public > liscence it is illegal to do this. So in that sense, the FreeBSD liscense > is even less restrictive. You're being far too polite about this :) THe "other" license has a "Borg" clause. To distribute the software, all of the other software, other than system libraries, upon which it depends, must be distributed under the GPL as well. There are common complaints that other free software is not "GPL-compatible". However, "GPL-compatible" means "can be assimulated and released as GPL instead of its own license." Additionally, the FSF claims that it is not allowed to link non-GPL software to GPL software, though they seem to have forgotten to put this in the license. And now, let's all go to the Church of Emacs, and sing, "GLP uber alles" :( To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-newbies" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199902201511.JAA43134>