On Thu, 13 Jul 2017 10:24:47 -0400 Alvin Starr via talk <[email protected]> wrote: > I believe the difference is that BSD allows an end user to take the > code and make the code part of a closed product where enchantments > and changes to the code are not shared. > > So the next person in the chain cannot have the advantage of access > to the source. > > I believe that the Microsoft network stack is an example of this, > where MS took the BSD network stack and incorporated it into Windows > but none of the BSD code or changes were visible to purchasers or > normal developers of Windows. > > Its about propagation of freedom. > hey Alvin, long time no chat :)
Imagine how much more Windows would have sucked if it was not for BSD licensing :) seriously though, sometimes it is in the best interest of everyone to have dev freedom... Let me mention PostgreSQL, which has spawned many small companies, which has allowed companies to 'own' their own customizations and enabled many (like me) to offer the single end user, their own code - some of the customizations to that codebase would never be of much benefit to anyone, except the company paying for the dev... Heck, PostgreSQL even spawned entire companies... Anyway, the debate is not like religion at all (as someone else said) it is actual application - BSD licensing has its place and GPL licensing has its very important place... Andre --- Talk Mailing List [email protected] https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk
