Ake Hedman wrote:

>
> BSD take away allot of freedom from the community. IBM license is
> something I never looked at.
>
And gives the developer all that freedom.  It's a simple shift over the
line from "Free for the community" to "Free to use however you like"

As a developer I prefer the BSD style license, it simply gives me more
freedom with other code.  When I release code for others to use then I
want others to use it for any purpose - I don't want to tie them down to
the community.  If you make a million off my code and no one can see
your additions or improvements then good for you.  I stand on your
shoulders sometimes, you stand on mine.  I could argue that code is
little more than knowledge, and as far as I can tell when I understand
something that is based on trigonometry I'm not forced to add my
discovery to all the trigonometry books out there.  I can sit on it, but
if I do let it be widely known I can't simply force others to release
their later discoveries based on my knowledge.

It's a simple difference of objectives, that's all.  The GPL is only
'more free' from a certian (narrow) perspective.  The BSD is much more
free in a more general sense.

The GPL could easily be argued to be more open than the BSD, but
certianly not more free in general.

Keep in mind that most modern operating systems got their TCP/IP stack
from the Berkely distribution with a BSD license.  The internet may well
not be today what it is if it weren't for the fact that companies could
include TCP/IP for free without having to divulge any of their other
associated code.  The internet wouldn't have been nearly as
interoperable if everyone made their own stack (each getting the bright
idea to 'fix' or 'enhance' it).  Plugging the 'standard' in was easy,
and since everyone had the same quirks they all worked together without
issue.  Companies, especially at the time, would have balked at a GPL or
even LGPL style license.  They either wouldn't have included it, or
worse made a half complete version that sort of worked with their own
systems.

A modern example would be Ogg Vorbis.  I believe they have a BSD license
primarily so companies can integrate the standard with minimum of fuss.
All the hits Linksys and other companies are taking because they used
GPL code and didn't release the modifications in a timely manner are
making them consider carefully whether the 'community' is worth the trouble.

Please don't take this the wrong way - the GPL is not any better or
worse a license than the BSD, or any license for that matter.  I could
see myself releasing under the GPL for specific projects or purposes,
but in general I lean towards more free/less open than more open/less
free.  I don't think that in the long run it really matters.

Plus RMS just rubs me the wrong way.  ;-)

-Adam

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.