Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 14:22:12 -0700 From: Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net> To: "Mr. K." <bsd@inbox.org> Cc: Jonathan Fosburgh <syjef@mail.mdanderson.org>, R Joseph Wright <rjoseph@mammalia.org>, freebsd-questions <freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: BSD license questions Message-ID: <20000907142212.I18862@fw.wintelcom.net> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0009071659480.3610-100000@inbox.org>; from bsd@inbox.org on Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 05:04:14PM -0400 References: <14775.65247.827000.782591@jef-nt.mdacc.tmc.edu> <Pine.BSF.4.21.0009071659480.3610-100000@inbox.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* Mr. K. <bsd@inbox.org> [000907 14:04] wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Sep 2000, Jonathan Fosburgh wrote:
> > > But, as Alfred replied, the license only goes one level deep. The software
> > > can be relicensed with proprietary terms although it must include a copy of
> > > the original BSD license stating its origins. Is this correct?
> > The original source/binary cannot itself be relicensed, that remains
> > forever the intellectual property of the Regents (until sold,
> > released, etc). Only modifications you make can be under a different
> > license. The BSD license just lets you release the code+mods in binary
> > only form, as opposed to the GPL where your mods are GPL as well. I
> > could do up my own distro of FreeBSD without changing any code. If I
> > do that, I still have to have a copyright statement saying that
> > portions are copyright The FreeBSD Project, Inc, The Regents of the
> > University of California, etc etc etc, but I don;t have to make the
> > source available except for the portions that are GPL'd.
> >
> The question does not concern source. It concerns distribution in binary
> without allowing redistribution. If the BSD licence allows you to release
> the code+mods in binary only form, what stops the end user from
> re-releasing the code+mods in binary only form? This is actually a good
> question, which I don't see an adequate answer to. The statement was that
> the licence only goes one level deep, but that is not said in the licence
> itself.
It is implied because the license says that the middle man must _only_:
"reproduce the above copyright notice, this list of conditions
and the following disclaimer"
Not:
b) You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that
in whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or
any part thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to
all third parties under the terms of this License.
Which is clause 2b of the GPL.
Not only that but you are contractually bound by whatever agreement
you make with the 'middle-man'. That contract may contain a clause
that no further distribution is allowed along with limits on users
and other constraints.
--
-Alfred Perlstein - [bright@wintelcom.net|alfred@freebsd.org]
"I have the heart of a child; I keep it in a jar on my desk."
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000907142212.I18862>