> Brad Knowles wrote:
> > 
> > At 10:00 AM -0500 2000/5/2, Dan Nelson wrote:
> > 
> > >  .. means that a user that wanted to use FreeBSD in a commercial
> > >  application would not be able to simply sell his product; he would have
> > >  to get a license from Sleepycat.
> > 
> I asked the Keith about this and he said it was wrong..
> (to my memory).
> I recall he said that as it would be grandfathered into freeBSD,
> (because we had 1.x already) and
> that anyone running  their software under freeBSD could do so 
> without added licencing, because it was already present on the
> platform.

 Ah - but that's "running under FreeBSD" - what about taking
 the FreeBSD source and using it in a different product...

 Just what does "running under FreeBSD" mean, anyway?

 If I sell a black box and use FreeBSD as the internal OS, but
 don't call it FreeBSD - is it "running under FreeBSD?"

 What if, for example, what if a product came together that
 was the Linux kernel with the FreeBSD command set?  Is that
 "running under FreeBSD?"  Would you be forced to send out
 your complete sources in that event?

 This is where the license issues are...

        - Dave Rivers -

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Reply via email to