BSD and the GPL
,----[ Quote ]
| One of the things that's been discussed a lot over the years is how Linux
| seems to succeed enmass across many different markets whereas BSD is
| relegated to just a sizeable slice of the server world. Finding anyone who
| actually runs any of the BSD's as a desktop seems very hard to come by. But
| why is this? Likely it's due to the excessively open nature of the BSD
| license, as many have claimed. In short, the GPL says that "if you change
| it, you must share your changes", yet the BSD license says, "Feel free to
| take what you like, but you don't need to give anything back." That in
| itself has lead to a plundering of the BSD's the likes of which would make
| any pirate proud.
`----
http://www.raiden.net/?cat=2&aid=357
Quote for the day:
"If a company fails to demonstrate serious charity that is not directly
connected to its core business, one can fairly suspect that “charitable”
donations such as Microsoft’s software gifts are more about marketing and
illegal economic dumping than about civicness. Add in monopoly deals like the
Indiana and Texas university systems and you have a pattern of aggressive
product dumping that merits full investigation by all legal authorities."
--Nathan Newman
Recent:
GPL vs BSD, a matter of sustainability
,----[ Quote ]
| So what can we conclude from all this? Both license models make software
| free, but only GPL software is sustainably free. The BSD gives greater
| freedom, the GPL gives more freedom. Choose which one you value more.
`----
http://www.matusiak.eu/numerodix/blog/index.php/2007/12/15/gpl-vs-bsd-a-matter-of-sustainability/
That Which We Call Free
,----[ Quote ]
| GNU Project and Free Software Foundation founder Richard Stallman posted a
| message on the OpenBSD -misc mailing list titled, "real men don't attack
| straw men", suggesting that some comments he had made were being
| misrepresented.
`----
http://kerneltrap.org/OpenBSD/That_Which_We_Call_Free
Related:
SELinux vs. OpenBSD's Default Security
,----[ Quote ]
| Darrin Chandler suggested, "security should not be grafted on, it should be
| integrated into the main development process. I'm sure the patch maintainers
| are doing their best, but this doesn't change the fundamental flaw in the
| process. It's not a flaw of their making, it's inherent in the situation. But
| it's still a flaw."
`----
http://kerneltrap.org/OpenBSD/SELinux_vs_OpenBSDs_Default_Security
Open Source coders caught stealing Open Source code
,----[ Quote ]
| Developers of OpenBSD took code from their brethren at Linux, violating
| the code's licence, the GPL. To the horror of the Linux folk, the
| OpenBSD licence allows proprietary use.
`----
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=38746
|
|
