From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri May 20 10:02:55 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37A1316A4CE for ; Fri, 20 May 2005 10:02:55 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [65.75.192.90]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B021743DB6 for ; Fri, 20 May 2005 10:02:54 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from tedwin2k (nat-rtr.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [65.75.197.130]) j4KA3Qb47992; Fri, 20 May 2005 03:03:26 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" To: "Joel" , Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 03:02:49 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-2022-JP" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1478 In-Reply-To: <20050520181927.B3E6.REES@ddcom.co.jp> Importance: Normal Subject: RE: BSD legal question X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 10:02:55 -0000 > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > [mailto:owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org]On Behalf Of Joel > Sent: Friday, May 20, 2005 2:40 AM > To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > Subject: Re: BSD legal question > > > > Legally, no, but that doesen't count > > when the press is interviewing Eric Raymond for the > bazillonth time. And > > it is those interviews that do the damage, not the legalities. > > Well, that explains a lot. > > You know, you don't have to jump either left or right when > they say jump > left. You can specify, for instance, v. 2.0 of the license, > and it never > changes until you specify something else, as long as you don't > give them > the copyright. Or you can specify a compatible license. Or you can > specify an incompatible license. > > You choose a license that fits your business model. > I am not choosing the licenses on the open source software I get. And although I honestly don't care one way or another about the GPL itself, I detest lying. And most GPL proponents engage in it vociferoiusly starting with their claim that the GPL is more "free" than the BSD license. That is a goddam lie if there ever was one. > > But, their definition of compatible is so narrow only the > GPL fits it. > > Then why do they have that page full of supposedly free or > open licenses > that says more than twenty licenses are both free _and_ compatible with > the GPL, including the non-advertising version of the BSD? > What the FSF means by compatible is those are the licenses that give up the copyright holders authority to determine distribution on the software, so anyone can come along and apply the more restrictive GPL distribution licensing on the software. > [snipping more stuff] > > > > Thanks for the warning. Now I know one of the things I'll need > > > to be very > > > careful about if I sell FreeBSD workstations with ports > pre-installed. > > > > > > > Exactly, you should never do this. You should sell > workstation hardware > > then have the customer contract with you to build the > software on them. > > It needs to be a separate contract and all of that. That is > exactly what > > we do when we deal with these sorts of things. > > Interesting that we come to the same conclusion here. > > Maybe that should be in a FAQ somewhere. Is it? > If it was the GPL bigots would scream about it. They hate the BSD license with a passion and GPL BSD code every chance they get. Just look at the Linux distros. There's absolutely no reason to apply the GPL license to the BSD utilities that are in those distros but you check the source code and you will see it there. And if you know nothing about Ghostscript and GNU Ghostscript/Alladin Ghostscript, you ought to read up on the dispute, it is a textbook example of rabid GPL bigotry being so rabid that they bit off their own nose. I assume somewhere there are reasonable people who have logical reasoned arguments that they personally prefer the GPL over the BSD license. But I've never read anything any of those people have written on the global scene. I suppose it's like the Baptist Church, you know the majority of them are normal people, but none of those are in control of the organization. Ted