Date: Sun, 8 Mar 1998 20:38:09 -0600 (CST) From: Jason Young <doogie@forbidden-donut.anet-stl.com> To: John Kelly <jak@cetlink.net> Cc: Karl Denninger <karl@mcs.net>, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Someone needs to re-develop "Softupdates" Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.980308202430.14284B-100000@forbidden-donut.anet-stl.com> In-Reply-To: <35034f2e.134015736@mail.cetlink.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Mon, 9 Mar 1998, John Kelly wrote: > It's amazing how some of the same people who decry commercializing > FreeBSD with donor control of funding have no objection to Kirk's > commercial hooks. What are you talking about? There's a difference between commercializing FreeBSD, Inc. and a third party developing proprietary code and redistributing it for profit. Do you object to anyone and everyone developing commercial code for FreeBSD? This aside, I don't see anything in the license for Softupdates about the commercial stuff either even though I have read the references on Julian's webpage about it. I would like to use this in my commercial ISP environment and have mailed Kirk asking for clarification. > Score 1 for the GPL. Is this a troll or your actual opinion? If Kirk has in any way used FreeBSD or any BSD licensed code in this, then he can still develop and market Softupdates as he wishes, and I would fight for his ability to do it. If FreeBSD was under the GPL and Kirk used one line of FreeBSD code, he would not have the option to sell his code. Since Kirk, according to the explanations I read, would like to get paid for this code when used commercially (read: eat, sleep indoors, have net access, etc) he would probably develop for an operating system that allowed him to do so. I should probably know better than to get involved in a BSD - GPL licensing debate but that above statement "Score 1 for the GPL" was just too dumb to leave unanswered, I'm sorry. The fact that there's some obvious mixups and misunderstandings in licensing for this which I'm trying to resolve for myself (and will post if anyone's interested) does not reflect in any way on either the BSD or GPL licensing scheme. Jason Young ANET Chief Network Engineer "Bother," said Pooh, "Eeyore, ready two photon torpedoes and lock phasers on the Heffalump, Piglet, meet me in transporter room three." -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQB1AwUBNQNWE6InE6ybC66VAQFkkgL+MmJkvLcfS+b76DhPp5JCxysxkyjPha5+ rENNJ8VqaPA1zvSacmvruHTMGjlLEFUNmhYtyfKAl0Fo1176T/+vzp184x9yEW1I 4P0c4M1rgDllN7E3notXIH1VyqyI/mGJ =96+8 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.96.980308202430.14284B-100000>