On May 1, 2007, at 1:22 PM, Tony Finch wrote:
On Fri, 27 Apr 2007, Peter da Silva wrote:
Why they decided that this particular clause was so terrible that they
had to wage a campaign to get CSRG to change it, I have never figured
out. The straw man they advanced to explain it still doesn't make
sense
to me, and they don't seem worried about people trademarking terms
like
Linux, which has the same effect...
NetBSD suffered a lot from variants of the advertising clause and had a
huge file containing copies of all of them.
So? That's not a big deal. The straw man wasn't "you might find it
convenient to keep track of this", it was "you'll have to list them all
in all your advertising". You don't, you only need to list the ones you
mention.
NetBSD also benefitted from it, because otherwise NetApp wouldn't have
had to advertise the fact that they were using code from NetBSD.
