Date: Fri, 03 Sep 1999 20:19:47 +0200 From: Roelof Osinga <roelof@nisser.com> To: Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@flood.ping.uio.no> Cc: walton@nordicrecords.com, freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Berkeley removes Advertising Clause Message-ID: <37D01143.2CA9BC5@nisser.com> References: <19990902221136.3481.qmail@modgud.nordicrecords.com> <xzpwvu8wh2p.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: > > ... > What a lot of people seem to have missed is that Berkeley's removal of > the advertising clause only affects Berkeley's code (that is, code > which is "Copyright 19xx The Regents of the University of > California.") Any *other* code released under the BSD license *with* > the advertising clause is unaffected. Contrast this with the common > practice, in the GPL world, of releasing code "under the terms of the > GNU Public License version 2 or newer", which makes it possible for > the FSF to change the license *even on code they were never involved > in writing*. Not truly in that the user gets to pick the licence he deems best from the entire range starting with the one it was originally released under. That can not be undone. Effectively you're right of course, in that most coders will just release to whatever's the current licence without actually reading or deliberating it. After all, a million lemmings can't be wrong! ;) Still, it does make BSD one of the, if not the, freest OS around. Roelof -- Home is where the (@) http://eboa.com/ is. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?37D01143.2CA9BC5>