From owner-freebsd-chat Mon Feb 22 19:19:38 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from lariat.lariat.org (lariat.lariat.org [206.100.185.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6C1B10FC1 for ; Mon, 22 Feb 1999 19:19:35 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from brett@lariat.org) Received: (from brett@localhost) by lariat.lariat.org (8.8.8/8.8.6) id UAA29876; Mon, 22 Feb 1999 20:19:25 -0700 (MST) Message-Id: <4.1.19990222201531.03fc77d0@mail.lariat.org> X-Sender: brett@mail.lariat.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.1 Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 20:18:31 -0700 To: Terry Lambert From: Brett Glass Subject: Re: GPL issues (Was: More important Windows Refund Day coverage) Cc: chat@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <199902230246.TAA14178@usr08.primenet.com> References: <19990222143416.A25682@netmonger.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org At 02:46 AM 2/23/99 +0000, Terry Lambert wrote: >If you support the goals of the GNU Manifesto, then I'd argue that >the GPL is a poor instrument by which the instrumentality that the >GNU Manifesto intends can be realized. > >A better instrument would be the Cygnus ECOS Public License, since >it takes specific notice of patent law and tit-for-tat patent >cross-licensing. > > http://www.cygnus.com/ecos/license.html > True, but it also forces disclosure of source code. This is a VERY serious issue in an embedded product, since the source code is key to differentiation in this market. The licensing essentially gives anyone the ability to copy the hard work you put into your product, gratis. Rather a Faustian bargain, I'd say. It's a bad business proposition. --Brett Glass To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message