Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2000 09:06:04 -0500 From: Peter Schwenk <schwenk@math.udel.edu> To: advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: Re: license (no longer Re: uptimes, Woo Hoo) Message-ID: <3875F2CC.6A771456@math.udel.edu> References: <200001071310.IAA17308@blackhelicopters.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
It appears to me, at least from a business standpoint, that the BSDL is the free-est of all in that all it requires of the licensee is recognition of the source of the work. I think that's why Apple's used it for it's upcoming Mac OS X. They can use the FreeBSD source and still not be required to ship source with their product. That way they can keep whatever fancy stuff they've done to it private and keep a competitive advantage. Not very cool from a GPL, Open Source standpoint, but I'm sure Apple likes it. I thought I heard a rumor that Apple has contributed some source back to the FreeBSD project, but that's just hearsay. Michael Lucas wrote: > So, is there any highfalutin' purpose behind the BSDL? Or is it as > nonpolitical as it appears to be? Having had this argument many > times, I'd like something better than "we don't care"; from an > advocacy point of view, that never comes across well. -- PETER SCHWENK | UNIX System Administrator Department of Mathematical Sciences | University of Delaware schwenk@math.udel.edu | (302)831-0437 <-NEW!!! To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3875F2CC.6A771456>