Date: 27 Jun 2003 09:54:28 -0700 From: swear@attbi.com (Gary W. Swearingen) To: FreeBSD Chat <freebsd-chat@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: RMS says: "Use BSD, for goodness sake!" Message-ID: <g3n0g3zcjf.0g3@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <3EFBFEBD.B8772772@mindspring.com> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20030625214311.00e5e240@localhost> <20030626110336.GW34365@iconoplex.co.uk> <20030626113553.GA53078@packet.org.uk> <20030626122023.GB763@nitro.dk> <20030626124601.GB57378@iconoplex.co.uk> <3EFBFEBD.B8772772@mindspring.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> writes: > For most of the things you mention, they are included in > "The Programmer's Workbench" from Bell Labs, which is now > available for free download, including ksh93, awk, troff, > etc.. > > Why not use the real things, if you are going to replace the > GNU replacements? Maybe because AT&T's licenses are over the "onerous" threshold too. Eg, ksh93's at http://www.research.att.com/sw/license/ast-open.html It impresses me as the most well-written license I've seen, and it pleases me by it's acknowledgment that the software is "proprietary" (which is contrary to the wide misuse of the term in the open-source world, while strictly accurate in the GNU-speak meaning of "not GPL-compatible"), BUT it is the most protective of an open source licensor's rights of any license I can remember and it has MANY onerous terms which I doubt that few derivers would be willing to work under. I'm not sure it's even worth the risks to use their software as-is, given terms such as found in the indemnification section. This term from the first section helps set the tone of the thing: You will regularly monitor the [AT&T] Website for any notices.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?g3n0g3zcjf.0g3>