On Sat, Sep 15, 2001 at 03:44:42AM -0400, Albert D. Cahalan wrote: > David N. Welton writes: > > "Berg, Bj?rn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > >> NetBSD has also a not so free sourcecode (I see it as package not > >> only the Kernel). Some parts are not published under GPL (like > >> Linux) but under the BSD License which restricts developers and > >> users. > > > > That's not correct. The BSD license is more liberal than the GPL, > > Nope. The original BSD license places restrictions on how you may > advertize BSD-based products. (must mention UC Berkeley) While the > university has dropped this requirement, many people cloned the > license with their own name in place of UC Berkeley. Thus you may > not advertize NetBSD without including a huge list of contributers. >
True, unless you rewrite that part of the license yourself. Just look at Microsoft. Where are their BSD acks?
