Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 10:24:19 -0400 From: Bob Johnson <bobj@atlantic.net> To: rsidd@physics.iisc.ernet.in Cc: lrosen@rosenlaw.com, questions@freebsd.org Subject: RE: what about clauses? Message-ID: <00052611134200.20051@scanner.engnet.ufl.edu>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 12:04:58 -0700 >From: "Lawrence E. Rosen" <lrosen@rosenlaw.com> >Subject: RE: what about clauses? >>[this author reference reinserted: ] >>[Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 22:57:53 +0530] >>[From: Rahul Siddharthan <rsidd@physics.iisc.ernet.in>] >>[Subject: Re: what about clauses?] >> >>But suppose Microsoft borrows your code and uses it inside one of >>their own programs (which is what I believe they do with BSD code), >>rather than keep your program aside as a separate work. What >>license will apply to their program, ie how exactly will they satisfy >>the conditions of the license below without making those clauses >>apply to the entire program -- which includes both your code and >>their code? > >I still don't believe the BSD license can be reasonably interpreted to >transform the entire portion of a derivative work into an open source >program. Whether the particular routines that incorporate the BSD code >would have to be distributed under the BSD license is probably There is no way you can interpret the BSD license to require that a derivative work be open source without being so unreasonable that a better word would be "insane". There is not even a hint of a requirement that derivative works must distribute their source code, or even the BSD source code. The only thing the license says is that if you use BSD code, you must display the BSD copyright and disclaimer. So the question you should be asking is "if I modify BSD code and use it in a commercial product, do I need to include the BSD copyright?" I would, if I were doing it, even if only to give them credit they deserve. The GPL used by Linux, on the other hand, very explicitly requires that derivative works must distribute ALL of their source, thus forcing an author to give his work away free whether he wants to or not. This discussion seems a lot like yet another example of someone with Linux experience expecting FreeBSD to be "the same thing as Linux, only different". >dependent >upon the facts as well as a court's interpretation of the >requirements of >the BSD license language. My recommendation is, be >perfectly clear what >you mean by your license agreements.... Don't rely >on ambiguities. > The BSD license _is_ perfectly clear, at least with regard to whether derivative works must be open source. If you (the original poster) are trying to write a NEW license agreement, you need the help of a specialist in copyright law. >/Larry Rosen -- Bob To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?00052611134200.20051>