Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2001 23:54:09 -0600 From: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org> To: cheney@soc.umass.edu, chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Licensing Philosophy Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20010703234545.045afc30@localhost> In-Reply-To: <20010703190637.A17080@sociostat.org> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20010703151716.00ca8a70@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010703141550.045f5340@localhost> <20010626174756.A61831@blackhelicopters.org> <200106260901.AA23134284@stmail.pace.edu> <20010626122845.A11960@xor.obsecurity.org> <20010626214230.D461@canyon.nothing-going-on.org> <20010626174756.A61831@blackhelicopters.org> <20010702211810.B325@sydney.worldwide.lemis.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20010703141550.045f5340@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010703151716.00ca8a70@localhost>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 05:06 PM 7/3/2001, Eric Cheney wrote: >Hi Folks. I'm new to FreeBSD. I've been using debian >prior to this; still got a debian box running. I like >my BSD box very much, though. Anyway, I'm >new to the FreeBSD philosophy too. Here a lot of opinions >about it on this list....I'd like to know more. Can someone >point me to one or two URL's that have some introductory >discussions about the licensing of FreeBSD? From the FreeBSD Handbook, Section 1.3.2 (See http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/history.html): >The goals of the FreeBSD Project are to provide software that may be >used for any purpose and without strings attached. Many of us have a >significant investment in the code (and project) and would certainly not >mind a little financial compensation now and then, but we are definitely >not prepared to insist on it. We believe that our first and foremost >``mission'' is to provide code to any and all comers, and for whatever >purpose, so that the code gets the widest possible use and provides the >widest possible benefit. This is, I believe, one of the most fundamental >goals of Free Software and one that we enthusiastically support.</p> > >That code in our source tree which falls under the GNU General Public >License (GPL) or Library General Public License (LGPL) comes with >slightly more strings attached, though at least on the side of enforced >access rather than the usual opposite. Due to the additional >complexities that can evolve in the commercial use of GPL software we >do, however, prefer software submitted under the more relaxed BSD >copyright when it's a reasonable option to do so. My personal opinion (and that of many others, though most of them are not as vocal as the GPL zealots) is that the FreeBSD project should take a much stronger stance against the GPL, because the GPL is contrary to the goal of having code that "may be used for any purpose and with no strings attached." I agree with Kirk McKusick, one of the "fathers" of BSD, who said: "The way it was characterized politically, you had copyright, which is what the big companies use to lock everything up; you had copyleft, which is free software's way of making sure they can't lock it up; and then Berkeley had what we called "copycenter", which is "take it down to the copy center and make as many copies as you want." --Brett Glass To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4.3.2.7.2.20010703234545.045afc30>