It would be interesting to see licenses differenciated by their intent.
As far as i understand GPL, the author get either paid by extensions of
the source or by license fees.
BSD seems to be not much different than public domain, to me it looks
like a good license for big companies or public institutions only.
Ralf.
Luke Hubbard ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
@Claus
1, 2, and 3 all look like good reasons to choose a BSD license to me.
Actually I saw a license the other day which made me laugh.
It was basically a BSD license with this added.
<snip>
Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without
modification,
are permitted provided that the following conditions are met:
* This software be used for good and not evil !
</snip>
I think I might adopt that license.
-- luke
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
osflash mailing list
[email protected]
http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org
_______________________________________________
osflash mailing list
[email protected]
http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org
