Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 13:16:35 -0500 From: dave <dleimbac@earthlink.net> To: Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org> Cc: questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: bsd copywright Message-ID: <20010528131635.G264@mutt> In-Reply-To: <15122.37890.136893.217892@guru.mired.org>; from mwm@mired.org on Mon, May 28, 2001 at 13:08:02 -0500 References: <30475131@toto.iv> <15122.24640.197637.721735@guru.mired.org> <20010528130207.A264@mutt> <15122.37550.213816.667821@guru.mired.org> <20010528130743.C264@mutt> <15122.37890.136893.217892@guru.mired.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
It doesn't matter if the stuff was under
an older version of the BSD license or
not.
here is the exact document.
<SNIP>
July 22, 1999
To All Licensees, Distributors of Any
Version of BSD:
As you know, certain of the Berkeley
Software Distribution ("BSD") source
code files require that further
distributions of products containing all
or
portions of the software, acknowledge
within their advertising materials
that such products contain software
developed by UC Berkeley and its
contributors.
Specifically, the provision reads:
" * 3. All advertising materials
mentioning features or use of this
software
* must display the following
acknowledgement:
* This product includes
software developed by the University of
* California, Berkeley and its
contributors."
Effective immediately, licensees and
distributors are no longer required to
include the acknowledgement within
advertising materials. Accordingly, the
foregoing paragraph of those BSD Unix
files containing it is hereby deleted
in its entirety.
William Hoskins
Director, Office of Technology Licensing
University of California, Berkeley
</SNIP>
so you see they don't enforce the
advertisement anymore and basically
declared it invalid.
On 2001.05.28 13:08 Mike Meyer wrote:
> Well, I started with the copyright
> link from the FreeBSD home
> page. That gets you the text of the
> relevant licenses. FreeBSD is
> based on the 4.4-BSD Lite
> distribution, which was made under the
> license with the advertising clause.
> I'm not sure if you can apply a
> later version of the license or not. I
> wouldn't be surprised if there
> were contact information in the
> licenses to check on such things,
> though.
>
> <mike
>
> dave <dleimbac@earthlink.net> types:
> > I thought that the real BSD license
> > repealed the advertising clause...
> >
> > hmmm... I will find out...
> >
> > Want me to tell you what I find out
> and
> > from whom?
> > (about the FreeBSD license)
> >
> > Dave
> > On 2001.05.28 13:02 Mike Meyer
> wrote:
> > > dave <dleimbac@earthlink.net>
> types:
> > > > What is the difference between
> the
> > > BSD
> > > > and the FreeBSD licenses?
> > >
> > >
> > > The BSD one was written by lawyers
> at
> > > UC Berkeley for the Berkeley
> > > Source Distribution. I'm not sure
> > > where FreeBSD's comes from. The
> BSD
> > > license contains a "advertising"
> > > clause - if you advertise the use
> of
> > > the material or it's features, you
> > > have to credit UCB.
> > >
> > > <mike
> > >
> > > > > dave <dleimbac@earthlink.net>
> > > types:
> > > > > > Its pretty short... You
> really
> > > > > should read it.
> > > > >
> > > > > Yes, but it's not the only one
> > > that
> > > > > applies. The kernel and much
> of
> > > > > userland are covered by the
> BSD
> > > > > license *as well as* the
> FreeBSD
> > > > > license. Parts of userland -
> and
> > > some
> > > > > optional kernel parts - are
> > > > > covered by the GPL.
> > > > >
> > > > > > It does what it says and
> that is
> > > > > very little. It basically
> says
> > > that a
> > > > > > person could take the
> existing
> > > > > kernel, compile it and use it
> > > > > commercially
> > > > > > so long as it is still BSD
> > > licensed.
> > > > >
> > > > > Those familiar with the GPL
> might
> > > > > conclude from this that if you
> > > build
> > > > > code based on either the BSD
> or
> > > > > FreeBSD licenses, you will be
> > > required
> > > > > to distribute it under the
> same
> > > terms
> > > > > as you got it, the same way
> that
> > > > > GPL works. This is *not* the
> case.
> > > > > Both licenses allow you to
> place
> > > > > further restrictions on
> anything
> > > you
> > > > > distribute based on that code
> -
> > > > > such as disallowing
> > > redistribution.
> > > > >
> > > > > <mike
> > > > > --
> > > > > Mike Meyer
<mwm@mired.org> http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/
> > > > > Independent
> WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix
> > > > > consultant, email for more
> > > > > information.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > --
> > > Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org> http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/
> > > Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix
> > > consultant, email for more
> > > information.
> > >
> >
> >
> --
> Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org> http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/
> Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix
> consultant, email for more
> information.
>
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?20010528131635.G264>