On 2/29/08, Hamie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > WHy MIT? IIUC the MIT license is BSD-like in that you explicitly give anyone > else (e.g. M$) the rights to take your code & resell it for profit, giving > nothing back (Unlike the GPL which states that everything is given back)... > Or do i read it incorrectly? >
You read it right, and this is exactly our point in using the MIT license. The OGP is a HARDWARE project. We don't care who buys our hardware, as long as they do so that we can use the profit to fund more open hardware development. We do not want to limit the use of the hardware in any way. Releasing our software under an MIT license makes it easier to support platforms that don't interact well with the GPL (like Windows), and makes it likelier that people will want to embed our hardware in their products, because there are no licensing issues with combining our code with theirs. Also, MIT was selected over BSD mostly because RMS suggested it. -- Timothy Normand Miller http://www.cse.ohio-state.edu/~millerti Open Graphics Project _______________________________________________ Open-graphics mailing list [email protected] http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
