Re: bsd vs gpl
On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 08:36:21AM +, Saifi Khan wrote: There are two rights associated. Rights to Usage Rights to Modify When you take a piece of code licensed under GPL and modify it, you are required to make your changes available and also under the same license ie. GPL. So the rights to modify comes with covenants in GPL. In the case of BSD and ASL, there is no such covenant. It may also be pertinent to know that under any license, the recipient cannot change the copyright ownership or the notice for eg. ... The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved. ... This is not an accurate representation. You have the right to modify with BSD-licensed code just as with GPLed code. The difference is that, if you distribute what you've modified, with the GPL you are required to conform to specific restrictions on how it may distributed, whereas with the BSD license that requirement does not exist. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Quoth The Financial Times: As an ultimate incentive to solve the millennium bug computer problem, China has ordered its airline executives to take a flight on January 1, 2000. pgp33YZBJvL4O.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: bsd vs gpl
On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 12:36:44PM -0700, prad wrote: thank you everyone for your comments on this topic. A few more links: + Copyfree licensing http://copyfree.org/ + Copyfree vs. Copyleft http://www.wikivs.com/wiki/Copyfree_vs_Copyleft + BSD/Copyfree vs. Corporate Copyleft http://sob.apotheon.org/?p=622 + Choose the right licensing model for security software http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/security/?p=610 -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] pgpcJ3CbiK5F8.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: bsd vs gpl
2009/3/11 David Kelly dke...@hiwaay.net: On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 01:20:18AM -0700, prad wrote: i've not paid much attention to licensing philosophy i the past, because for me it was always windoze vs the goodguys. however, recently i've become aware of there being a chasm within the goodguys in that the bsd attitude is do what you want as long as you give credit to the creator, whereas the gpl folks say do what you want as long as you keep it free. is this a fair summation? No, too simple. The source code is always free under BSD, contrary to what GPL proponents claim. Just that under BSD you are free to keep ownership of your own work. To decide how *you* wish to distribute. You may limit the redistribution of your work which includes BSD components. GPL people seem to forget the base BSD code is still free, its just that they want your enhancements too. Its a lesson in how to lie the way they claim this is somehow free and/or freedom. GPL states that if you make changes those changes must be made available under the same terms as the original source code. Yet somehow darlings of the GPL world such as Red Hat, MySQL, and others, skirt around that onerous requirement. -- David Kelly N4HHE, dke...@hiwaay.net Whom computers would destroy, they must first drive mad. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org Sorry, what do Red Hat et al do to 'skirt' around the requirements of the GPL? They are some of the biggest supporters of free software. They abide by the letter AND the spirit of the GPL. They are a model free software business; charging for support etc is the most legitimate way of making money from software. Chris -- R $h ! $- ! $+ $@ $2 @ $1 .UUCP. (sendmail.cf) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: bsd vs gpl
2009/3/11 David Kelly dke...@hiwaay.net: On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 01:20:18AM -0700, prad wrote: i've not paid much attention to licensing philosophy i the past, because for me it was always windoze vs the goodguys. however, recently i've become aware of there being a chasm within the goodguys in that the bsd attitude is do what you want as long as you give credit to the creator, whereas the gpl folks say do what you want as long as you keep it free. is this a fair summation? No, too simple. The source code is always free under BSD, contrary to what GPL proponents claim. Just that under BSD you are free to keep ownership of your own work. To decide how *you* wish to distribute. You may limit the redistribution of your work which includes BSD components. GPL people seem to forget the base BSD code is still free, its just that they want your enhancements too. Its a lesson in how to lie the way they claim this is somehow free and/or freedom. GPL states that if you make changes those changes must be made available under the same terms as the original source code. Yet somehow darlings of the GPL world such as Red Hat, MySQL, and others, skirt around that onerous requirement. -- David Kelly N4HHE, dke...@hiwaay.net Whom computers would destroy, they must first drive mad. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org Sorry, what do Red Hat et al do to 'skirt' around the requirements of the GPL? They are some of the biggest supporters of free software. They abide by the letter AND the spirit of the GPL. They are a model free software business; charging for support etc is the most legitimate way of making money from software. Chris -- ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: bsd vs gpl
prad wrote: On Wed, 11 Mar 2009 01:20:18 -0700 prad p...@towardsfreedom.com wrote: do people here have any thoughts on the two different licenses? thank you everyone for your comments on this topic. the links some of you provided were very interesting and helpful. i had no idea there were so many licenses either!!! it is a curious situation that the 'freedom' which insists on propagating itself (gpl), can be argued to be not really free, while 'freedom' without such a restriction can permit its own termination. i like this summation the best: The bottom line is, the GPL is not anti-commercial or anti- capitalistic; it is only anti-proprietary. The BSD license, on the other hand, is very unrestrictive, and allows proprietary knockoffs. Which you choose depends on what you need and what you value. There's nothing more to it than that. (http://slashdot.org/articles/99/06/23/1313224.shtml) now off to establish what we value ... Just curious, why is what a 5 year-old article having to say with regards to licensing at all relevant? These licenses aren't worth the paper they are printed on until tested in court. The Monsoon Multimedia/BusyBox lawsuit, which was started years after this article was written, is far more relevant. Ted ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: bsd vs gpl
The ACM Queue (1 May 2004) article by Jay Michaelson of Wasabi Systems is very insightful. There is no such thing as Free (Software) lunch Please take a look at http://queue.acm.org/detail.cfm?id=1005066 In 2009, you would like your product (esp infrastructure product or platform) to reach out to as many people as possible and be used in as many ways possible. not always true. BSD / ASL 2.0 license precisely help one accomplish that in a very benign way. generally true, anyway i don't consider wasabysystems (destroyers of NetBSD) as a reference. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: bsd vs gpl
On Thu, 12 Mar 2009, Wojciech Puchar wrote: The ACM Queue (1 May 2004) article by Jay Michaelson of Wasabi Systems is very insightful. There is no such thing as Free (Software) lunch Please take a look at http://queue.acm.org/detail.cfm?id=1005066 In 2009, you would like your product (esp infrastructure product or platform) to reach out to as many people as possible and be used in as many ways possible. not always true. Let me re-state for your benefit: In 2009, you would like your product (esp infrastructure product or platform) benefits to reach to as many people as possible and be useful in as many ways possible BSD / ASL 2.0 license precisely help one accomplish that in a very benign way. generally true, anyway i don't consider wasabysystems (destroyers of NetBSD) as a reference. Do you have any credible proof ? This link may help you http://mail-index.netbsd.org/netbsd-users/2006/08/30/0016.html My suggestion, an objective assessment of the situation for what it is and not what it seems to be is more beneficial. This also helps us avoid 'fuzzy' to 'vague' observations like: . generally true . somewhat true . not always true . not always false . may be true on mars . may not be true on jupiter ... Think about it ! thanks Saifi. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: bsd vs gpl
Do you have any credible proof ? yes. i used NetBSD quite a long. i started turning into crap just when wasabisystems appeared and employed good deal of NetBSD developers. Then i switched to FreeBSD because i wanted WORKING system, while older version no longer worked on new computers. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: bsd vs gpl
Polytropon wrote: I'd like to make an addition: The freedom of the BSDL intentionally allows to close sources. This can be considered theft, if one would like to use this interpretation. When taking some BSDL code, there's no need to contribute anything back. One argument could be that the money or hardware given to the FreeBSD developers is abused by those who silently take advantage of their work. But finally, it's always the developer who decides what to do with his own work. If he intends to allow others to make money from his code without giving anything back, it's his choice to do so. If a supporter doesn't like this decision, he should think about his support. Closing code doesn't make the code disappear which it is based upon, so code doesn't get unfree. I know, this can lead into an endless discussion. It has already taken place on other platforms, such as here: http://www.osnews.com/comments/20740 Forgive me my comment. :-) Often overlooked, but the open nature of the BSD license and similar contribute to the adoption and widespread use technology by industry. I wager that if software like Xorg, the BSD IP stack, and etc... were licensed under GPL or similar restrictive licenses, these technologies might not have lasted. Open (in the BSDL sense) technology seems to do better in the long run... Ironic? Best Regards, Nathan Lay ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
bsd vs gpl
i've not paid much attention to licensing philosophy i the past, because for me it was always windoze vs the goodguys. however, recently i've become aware of there being a chasm within the goodguys in that the bsd attitude is do what you want as long as you give credit to the creator, whereas the gpl folks say do what you want as long as you keep it free. is this a fair summation? do people here have any thoughts on the two different licenses? -- In friendship, prad ... with you on your journey Towards Freedom http://www.towardsfreedom.com (website) Information, Inspiration, Imagination - truly a site for soaring I's ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: bsd vs gpl
On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 8:20 AM, prad p...@towardsfreedom.com wrote: however, recently i've become aware of there being a chasm within the goodguys in that the bsd attitude is do what you want as long as you give credit to the creator, whereas the gpl folks say do what you want as long as you keep it free. is this a fair summation? do people here have any thoughts on the two different licenses? -- In friendship, prad There are two rights associated. Rights to Usage Rights to Modify When you take a piece of code licensed under GPL and modify it, you are required to make your changes available and also under the same license ie. GPL. So the rights to modify comes with covenants in GPL. In the case of BSD and ASL, there is no such covenant. It may also be pertinent to know that under any license, the recipient cannot change the copyright ownership or the notice for eg. ... The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved. ... -- thanks Saifi. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: bsd vs gpl
On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 4:20 AM, prad p...@towardsfreedom.com wrote: do people here have any thoughts on the two different licenses? -- In friendship, prad This is NOT a simple issue . In http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_free_software_licences http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Software_licenses http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_licences pages and links in them , it is possible to find sufficiently detailed information . The main point is that any dispute with respect to software licenses are solved in courts and final decisions are made by judges . This means that any legal advise can only be made by legally authorized persons . The other views are only exchange of point of views . Thank you very much . Mehmet Erol Sanliturk ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: bsd vs gpl
i've not paid much attention to licensing philosophy i the past, because for me it was always windoze vs the goodguys. however, recently i've become aware of there being a chasm within the goodguys in that the bsd attitude is do what you want as long as you give credit to the creator, whereas the gpl folks say do what you want as long as you keep it free. is this a fair summation? not quite. keep it free means that you HAVE TO publish sources of your whole product if you will just use a few lines of code from GPL sources. It's not free licence, it's just another kind communism. In contrary BSD licence allows you to JUST USE THE CODE. That's all. Nothing forbids you to write say prad-OS that will reuse all drivers from FreeBSD, and sell it commercially in binary only form. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: bsd vs gpl
On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 01:20:18AM -0700, prad wrote: i've not paid much attention to licensing philosophy i the past, because for me it was always windoze vs the goodguys. however, recently i've become aware of there being a chasm within the goodguys in that the bsd attitude is do what you want as long as you give credit to the creator, whereas the gpl folks say do what you want as long as you keep it free. is this a fair summation? No, too simple. The source code is always free under BSD, contrary to what GPL proponents claim. Just that under BSD you are free to keep ownership of your own work. To decide how *you* wish to distribute. You may limit the redistribution of your work which includes BSD components. GPL people seem to forget the base BSD code is still free, its just that they want your enhancements too. Its a lesson in how to lie the way they claim this is somehow free and/or freedom. GPL states that if you make changes those changes must be made available under the same terms as the original source code. Yet somehow darlings of the GPL world such as Red Hat, MySQL, and others, skirt around that onerous requirement. -- David Kelly N4HHE, dke...@hiwaay.net Whom computers would destroy, they must first drive mad. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: bsd vs gpl
On Wed, 11 Mar 2009 09:02:47 -0500, David Kelly dke...@hiwaay.net wrote: The source code is always free under BSD, contrary to what GPL proponents claim. Terms like enslavement of code come into mind, BSD thieves and others... But this isn't only the case with BSDL. The MIT uses a similar license for X, as far as I know, and Apache does it as well. Just that under BSD you are free to keep ownership of your own work. The BSDL doesn't change anything related to copyright (which is on the side of the coders). GPL states that if you make changes those changes must be made available under the same terms as the original source code. Yet somehow darlings of the GPL world such as Red Hat, MySQL, and others, skirt around that onerous requirement. That's why the GPL is often called a viral license. As far as I know, not only using GPL code, also linking against a GPL library would require to put the initial work under GPL. I'd like to make an addition: The freedom of the BSDL intentionally allows to close sources. This can be considered theft, if one would like to use this interpretation. When taking some BSDL code, there's no need to contribute anything back. One argument could be that the money or hardware given to the FreeBSD developers is abused by those who silently take advantage of their work. But finally, it's always the developer who decides what to do with his own work. If he intends to allow others to make money from his code without giving anything back, it's his choice to do so. If a supporter doesn't like this decision, he should think about his support. Closing code doesn't make the code disappear which it is based upon, so code doesn't get unfree. I know, this can lead into an endless discussion. It has already taken place on other platforms, such as here: http://www.osnews.com/comments/20740 Forgive me my comment. :-) -- Polytropon From Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: bsd vs gpl
That's why the GPL is often called a viral license. As GPL is a communist licence. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: bsd vs gpl
Reader Chemisor advances a theory in his journal that a linguistic misunderstanding is at the root of many disagreements over different licensing philosophies, in particular BSD vs. GPL. The argument is that GPL adherents desire the freedom of their /code/, while those on the BSD side want freedom for their /projects/. http://news.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/07/08/1832255 could we follow up to -chat please? -questions is usually meant for freeBSD questions. -- Eitan Adler Security is increased by designing for the way humans actually behave. -Jakob Nielsen ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: bsd vs gpl
At 16:09 11/03/2009, Wojciech Puchar wrote: That's why the GPL is often called a viral license. As GPL is a communist licence. No, even communist are more generous ... --- Useful Acronyms: GPL = Greedy Pengüin Licence ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: bsd vs gpl
At 16:09 11/03/2009, Wojciech Puchar wrote: That's why the GPL is often called a viral license. As GPL is a communist licence. No, even communist are more generous ... It's not funny. Communism is common today, and it's getting stronger from day they just changed to names to hide. Computers are just one thing. As usual - Richard Stallman probably wanted good, but - it turned as usual. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: bsd vs gpl
On Wed, 11 Mar 2009 01:20:18 -0700 prad p...@towardsfreedom.com wrote: do people here have any thoughts on the two different licenses? thank you everyone for your comments on this topic. the links some of you provided were very interesting and helpful. i had no idea there were so many licenses either!!! it is a curious situation that the 'freedom' which insists on propagating itself (gpl), can be argued to be not really free, while 'freedom' without such a restriction can permit its own termination. i like this summation the best: The bottom line is, the GPL is not anti-commercial or anti- capitalistic; it is only anti-proprietary. The BSD license, on the other hand, is very unrestrictive, and allows proprietary knockoffs. Which you choose depends on what you need and what you value. There's nothing more to it than that. (http://slashdot.org/articles/99/06/23/1313224.shtml) now off to establish what we value ... -- In friendship, prad ... with you on your journey Towards Freedom http://www.towardsfreedom.com (website) Information, Inspiration, Imagination - truly a site for soaring I's ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: bsd vs gpl
On Wed, 11 Mar 2009, prad wrote: On Wed, 11 Mar 2009 01:20:18 -0700 prad p...@towardsfreedom.com wrote: do people here have any thoughts on the two different licenses? thank you everyone for your comments on this topic. the links some of you provided were very interesting and helpful. i had no idea there were so many licenses either!!! The ACM Queue (1 May 2004) article by Jay Michaelson of Wasabi Systems is very insightful. There is no such thing as Free (Software) lunch Please take a look at http://queue.acm.org/detail.cfm?id=1005066 In 2009, you would like your product (esp infrastructure product or platform) to reach out to as many people as possible and be used in as many ways possible. BSD / ASL 2.0 license precisely help one accomplish that in a very benign way. thanks Saifi. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
