From owner-freebsd-chat Tue Feb 9 16:21:45 1999 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA05123 for freebsd-chat-outgoing; Tue, 9 Feb 1999 16:21:45 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from smtp01.primenet.com (smtp01.primenet.com [206.165.6.131]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id QAA05118 for ; Tue, 9 Feb 1999 16:21:43 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from tlambert@usr08.primenet.com) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp01.primenet.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA08059; Tue, 9 Feb 1999 17:21:26 -0700 (MST) Received: from usr08.primenet.com(206.165.6.208) via SMTP by smtp01.primenet.com, id smtpd007938; Tue Feb 9 17:21:19 1999 Received: (from tlambert@localhost) by usr08.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id RAA01583; Tue, 9 Feb 1999 17:20:57 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <199902100020.RAA01583@usr08.primenet.com> Subject: Re: GPL *again* (was: New CODA release) To: dyson@iquest.net Date: Wed, 10 Feb 1999 00:20:57 +0000 (GMT) Cc: tlambert@primenet.com, lcremean@tidalwave.net, brett@lariat.org, jkh@zippy.cdrom.com, licia@o-o.org, chat@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <199902100010.TAA61330@y.dyson.net> from "John S. Dyson" at Feb 9, 99 07:10:59 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > > > The standard BSD license is already poison pilled. In fact, it > > > is quite fair by requiring attribution. Just be sure to provide > > > an extra 20-30K of CDROM space for attribution. :-). > > > > Wrong. > > > > http://sleepycat.com/license.net > > > > Only the GPL prevents BSD licensed code from being virulized; other > > licenses are not so kind as to exclude themselves from contaminating > > BSD licensed code. > > Well, I tend to think in terms of GPL, simply because it is predominant. > In the general case of poison pill-ing, you probably have to tune it > on a per license basis. Maybe I was wrong in thinking that the context > was GPL? The problem is that it's the GPL "poison pilled" against the UCB license, not the other way around. As long as that's the case, people can "route around" the GPL's brain damage to destructively license UCB code. That's what the SleepyCat people did to dbm 2.x. I'm not saying that they didn't add significant value; but they licensed the code under a commercially damaging license. A derivative work prepared by a third party would retain the virus, and, further, not be reversible. The only saving grace is that they are actively maintaining the code, so it hasn't floated elsewhere... yet. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message