On 4/12/06, Ted Mittelstaedt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hey I have an idea. Why doesen't the OpenSSL community tell the GPL > to modify it's license to be compliant to the OpenSSL license? That > seems > to be a mirror of what the GPL people are demanding. What's sauce for > the goose is sauce for the gander.
I have two thoughts on this. 1) The GPL is a well-understood license, and its terms are well-understood. Its philosophy is (though fairly extremist) generally good at heart. The "obnoxious BSD advertising clause" in BSD was removed by Berkeley when they realized that they had nothing to gain from its being there. Conversely, the very term that you're trying to get them to remove is the entire core of what the GNU philosophy gets out of its license. 2) That said, the GNU Free Documentation License is anything but. You want to talk about something that allows for "obnoxious advertising clauses"? Look at the "immutable sections" clause. -Kyle H ______________________________________________________________________ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org User Support Mailing List [email protected] Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
