From owner-freebsd-advocacy Wed Oct 30 11:16: 0 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A6B337B401 for ; Wed, 30 Oct 2002 11:15:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from pilchuck.reedmedia.net (pilchuck.reedmedia.net [209.166.74.74]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D51AB43E3B for ; Wed, 30 Oct 2002 11:15:58 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from reed@reedmedia.net) Received: from reed by pilchuck.reedmedia.net with local-esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 186yJK-0002Ke-00; Wed, 30 Oct 2002 11:15:26 -0800 Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2002 11:15:26 -0800 (PST) From: "Jeremy C. Reed" To: "Anthony C. Chavez" Cc: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: Re: DoD study In-Reply-To: <20021030185817.GA8079@anthonychavez.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Anthony C. Chavez wrote: > Specifically, Table 1 on page 15. There seems to be an inaccuracy or > two about the BSD license there. Which ones? I do see that it should have the "Original source can be incorporated into closed source products" property checked. > I'm wondering if this document, although slightly GPL-slanted, could be > used as ammo to show BSD's usage by the DoD. Any thoughts? Yes. Good advocacy. But I wonder what they are used for. Jeremy C. Reed http://www.reedmedia.net/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message