From owner-freebsd-hackers Wed Jun 10 18:27:50 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA11533 for freebsd-hackers-outgoing; Wed, 10 Jun 1998 18:27:50 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from dyson.iquest.net (dyson.iquest.net [198.70.144.127]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id SAA11269; Wed, 10 Jun 1998 18:26:14 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dyson@dyson.iquest.net) Received: (from root@localhost) by dyson.iquest.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA11277; Wed, 10 Jun 1998 20:25:29 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from dyson) Message-Id: <199806110125.UAA11277@dyson.iquest.net> Subject: Re: Copyright infringement in FreeBSD/alpha In-Reply-To: from "Srdjan M. Tijanic" at "Jun 11, 98 02:33:26 am" To: smt@bocal.cs.univ-paris8.fr (Srdjan M. Tijanic) Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 20:25:29 -0500 (EST) Cc: thorpej@nas.nasa.gov, dyson@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-alpha@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, core@FreeBSD.ORG, cgd@netbsd.org, ross@netbsd.org, core@netbsd.org From: "John S. Dyson" Reply-To: dyson@FreeBSD.ORG X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL38 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Srdjan M. Tijanic said: > > First word : > I am using FreeBSD, NetBSD and OpenBSD (in alphabetical order). > > About Copyright : > Why don't create something like "*BSD Copyright" ? > > Last word : > My prefered OS is *BSD ! > Certain groups have problems internally with their own copyright issues, how can we all agree when they have historically not been able to agree with themselves??? I am personally for the non-advertising clause pseudo-BSD copyright, in order to simplify commercialization of the code. Whatever is on the license can significantly change how code can effectively be used. If one is needing self-engrandisement, they can put all kinds of advertising clauses on the code. Of course, that can decrease the desirability of the code signficantly, even if the code is technically excellent. If the goal is for the code to be used, and while at it, make some money on it yourself, then simpler licenses with simple credits clauses are desirable. It seems to me that the license (and relative litigious nature) provided by the author is part of the formula that gives software value, along with technical excellence and applicability issues. All this said, if a license is totally unacceptable, or the risk is judged too high, the codebases will soon totally diverge. The existance of a project will not be in jeopardy, but usage of individual components will change as needed. -- John | Never try to teach a pig to sing, dyson@freebsd.org | it just makes you look stupid, jdyson@nc.com | and it irritates the pig. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message