From owner-freebsd-chat Tue Dec 18 11:43:26 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from pilchuck.reedmedia.net (pilchuck.reedmedia.net [209.166.74.74]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B817937B416 for ; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 11:43:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from reed by pilchuck.reedmedia.net with local-esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 16GQ91-0005d0-00; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 11:43:19 -0800 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 11:43:18 -0800 (PST) From: "Jeremy C. Reed" To: FreeBSD Chat Subject: Re: GPL nonsense: time to stop In-Reply-To: <20011218110645.A2061@tisys.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Tue, 18 Dec 2001, Nils Holland wrote: > 3) BSD licensed source code of the kernel remains BSD licensed. However, do > to the GPL implcations, we are required to make sure that our BSDL code is > available for free, along with the GPL code mentioned in 2). Now that our Just because BSD code is available doesn't mean it has to be available. (Notice that the license allows for redistribution in binary forms without source.) > code has always been available for free, I guess that basically means, > well, nothing new for us. But what if I use the BSD code and integrate it with my own code and I don't want to make the code for the resulting project available? Of course, a company could manually go through all code and rewrite the code with conflicting licenses. But that is a hassle -- many want to use the BSD code in the first place because it is (supposed to be) clean. Jeremy C. Reed http://bsd.reedmedia.net/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message