Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2003 15:25:24 -0700 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> To: Theo Markettos <theo@markettos.org.uk> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD licence and 'the advertisement clause' Message-ID: <20030820222524.GB87772@rot13.obsecurity.org> In-Reply-To: <20030820213337.GA27460@chiark.greenend.org.uk>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
[-- Attachment #1 --] On Wed, Aug 20, 2003 at 10:33:38PM +0100, Theo Markettos wrote: > I'm looking to incorporate some source from FreeBSD into a project of mine > under the GPL. I see that Berkeley dropped their requirement on the > advertising clause which makes FreeBSD code compatible with the GPL. The > main FreeBSD licence doesn't include the advertising clause. > > However, much of FreeBSD's source still includes the advertising clause. > For example src/sys/net/if.h and src/sys/net/radix.h in source checked out > of CVS a few days ago. Most of these are for Berkeley, although there are a > few for other individuals. > > What is the licensing position? Code that is copyrighted by the Regents has the license change, everything else does not. Many FreeBSD contributors will be happy to drop the clause if you just ask, though. Kris [-- Attachment #2 --] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQE/Q/VUWry0BWjoQKURAsvTAKDHzFMuITpMu0+7N0Hb29iKy4iYlgCdFixK sWJrPFZQLWF3TaZBvtE5beY= =cjQR -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----home | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030820222524.GB87772>