I have found David Wheeler's analysis of the GPL vs. BSD-style licences very helpful:
GPL, BSD, and NetBSD - why the GPL rocketed Linux to success http://www.dwheeler.com/blog/2006/09/01/ Debates on this topic can be endless, in particular since the arrival of the GPLv3 which had to be updated 17 years after its introduction in 1991 and which is usually criticised for being "too complicated" compared to GPLv2 or BSD. That said, I agree with Mr. Wheeler that the GPL is a stronger incentive for companies to fight fair. A longstanding rumor, for which I have no proof, is that parts of Microsoft's network code was simply copied from BSD code, which if true would naturally explain why Microsoft is so hesitant to documents its protocols not to mention its code. Sean On Jan 20, 2008 4:35 PM, Iain Wallace <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Maybe we need a discussion on the pros and cons of the various OSS > licenses. Recommend me one! > > - > Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please > visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. > Unofficial list archive: > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ > - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
