Am 21.04.2014 02:05, schrieb Rick Zeman: >> "free" needs a context, the GPL is free, but you are not >> free to use GPL licesed code, change it, include it in >> a commercial product and make your product closed source > > Yeah, I've seen the Postfix license text more time than I can count > (in every config file, too), and I evenread that wiki page. > However the line > > The IBM Public License (IPL) is a free software / open-source software > license written and sometimes used by IBM. It is approved by the Open > Source Initiative and is described as a "free software license" by the > Free Software Foundation(FSF). > > to me reaffirmed not contravened Postfix's "freeness" since I would > think that something called the "Free Software Foundation" might be > considered somewhat authoritative?
again: you need to look at the context it depends *what* someone tends to do with whatever software under whatever license BSD: copyleft, do whatever you want in any context you can imagine most other licenses: be careful in case of a closed source product
