On 2010-03-22 22:48:27 -0400, John Hasler said:
Purchasing a certificate granting the right to label one's product UNIX
does not make it a BSD.
Being a derivative of 4.4 BSD makes it a BSD; Being certified by the
Open Group makes it a UNIX. Mac OS X is a BSD UNIX.
The market reality...
...is irrelevant to many of us.
Many may wish it weren't relevant, but it is. The FSF recognized that
the GPL was a poor match for the market realities of library use nearly
20 years ago when the FSF created the GNU Library Public License, now
the Lesser GPL, for precisely this reason.
...is that many programmers work on projects that are, at least in
part, closed source. Open source licenses other than the GPL allow
these programmers to use and contribute to open source projects.
The Berkeley license as well as _some_ other Open Source licenses permit
them to keep some of their changes secret. This is the very reason some
programmers use the GPL.
People and organizations who want to keep code secret are going to do
so. It is naive to think that they will change their whole business
model just to use a library. Instead, they will use libraries with
licenses that allow them to keep some code private while still open
sourcing other code thus contributing to the sum total of open source
code.
warmest regards,
Ralph
--
Raffael Cavallaro
_______________________________________________
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss