Date: Sat, 13 Jul 1996 18:25:16 GMT From: James Raynard <james@jraynard.demon.co.uk> To: miker@cs.utexas.edu Cc: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: What's so evil about GPL Message-ID: <199607131825.SAA02254@jraynard.demon.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <199607131746.MAA03210@oink.cs.utexas.edu> (message from Hung Michael Nguyen on Sat, 13 Jul 1996 12:46:12 -0500 (CDT))
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>>>>> Hung Michael Nguyen <miker@cs.utexas.edu> writes:
>
> Hello,
> I have heard many a times on the various FreeBSD fora that GPL is in some
> way 'bad'. Can somebody clue me in as to exactly why (esp. vs. the BSD
> copyright)?
Here is an entry I am considering putting in the next version of the
FAQ:-
<sect1>
<heading> Why don't you use the GPL?</heading>
<p>
The FreeBSD core team made a conscious decision not to distribute new
code under the GPL (GNU Public Licence) as they felt that the
standard Berkeley copyright better met their aims of making software
widely available under the simplest possible licensing conditions.
However, code already in the source tree is subject to various
copyrights, depending on how the author chose to distribute it,
including the GPL. GPL'd code is being re-written, wherever feasible,
in the interests of greater consistency, but there is some code, such
as the C compiler, which is unlikely ever to be re-written.
<p>
Here is a Berkeley copyright notice, in its entirety:-
[BSD copyright snipped]
Interested readers are invited to obtain a copy of the GPL (too long
to reproduce here, alas) and decide for themselves on the relative
merits of the two copyrights. Discussions on this topic probably
belong in the gnu.* Usenet hierarchy.
--
James Raynard, Edinburgh, Scotland
james@jraynard.demon.co.uk
http://www.freebsd.org/~jraynard/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199607131825.SAA02254>