Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!munnari.OZ.AU!spool.mu.edu!howland.erols.net!ais.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!super.zippo.com!zdc!szdc!szdc-e!news From: "John S. Dyson" <dyson@freebsd.org> Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.unix.bsd.misc,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy Subject: Re: Linux vs whatever Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 09:20:06 -0500 Organization: John S. Dyson's home machine Lines: 74 Message-ID: <32F1FF96.41C67EA6@freebsd.org> References: <32DFFEAB.7704@usa.net> <32EE0B70.1657@ml.com> <5claa2$jq1@cynic.portal.ca> <32f342b7.11963784@uns.bris.ac.uk> <5cnqsl$78o@cynic.portal.ca> <32EFDF58.41C67EA6@freebsd.org> <Pine.LNX.3.93.970130105508.3513B-100000@dogbert.sitewerks.com> <5crvoa$up4@camel2.mindspring.com> <slrn5f3sp0.snc.ralsina@ultra7.unl.edu.ar> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (X11; I; FreeBSD 3.0-CURRENT i386) Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.os.linux.misc:155396 comp.os.linux.setup:94821 comp.unix.bsd.misc:2171 comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy:51500 comp.os.os2.advocacy:264665 Roberto Alsina wrote: > > Lets put this question the other way: Are there BSD equivalents of the above? > No? > > If the BSD license makes commercial app developers happier, then where > are all the commercial apps for FreeBSD, OpenBSD and NetBSD? > There is a difference between "for FreeBSD, etc" and "using FreeBSD, etc." And, there are alot of commercial ventures using the *BSD networking code. In fact, people can look at our code and not worry much about taint. GPL is more of a problem. > > Then what's your point? > GPL inhibits commercialization of faux-free (I mean GPLed) code. > > Making more money than the strictly necessary may be bad (but this is > just a personal belief, and has nothing to do with software licensing). > That seems to be a cultural issue of alot of GPL advocates. Note that there will still be people who make more than strictly necessary distributing (I mean selling) GPLed code in the guise of support. I think that this idealism is getting "used" by some people. At least the BSD licensing makes no claims about morality -- it is simply a license. > > Wouldn't it be better if we had not only the original program, but also > the modified one? I know that doesn't happen all the time, but even if it > happened only *once* it would be a net gain for society. > What is "society"? Since we won't even touch or modify GPLed code at work due to it's restrictive license terms -- work that could have been applied to that GPLed code will be applied to BSDed code. > > BSD advocates keep claiming that GPL forces people to reinvent the wheel > because they can't include GPLed code in their commercial products. > But look at it this way: BSD license forces people to reinvent the wheels > that get added to the commercial version based on BSD code. > That is okay, because the work that is done to the commerical code is usually a financial investement. They own that IP -- but of course GPL tries to condemn that to the "public good." I think that most people do not like for their property to be condemned. > > So, both licenses force people to rewrite some code. At least the GPL makes > the ones that make the money do it. > More accurately, GPL compels people who create ideas give their ideas away. Of course, if you stay away from modifying GPLed code, then you are not compelled to give things away. > > PS: I don't have anything against the BSDs or the BSD license. It's just > that their advocates seem to think the GPL is *bad*!. It isn't bad, it's > just based on a higher goal. > That "higher goal" statement is a value judgement. Some people don't think that kind of socialism is a "higher goal." John