[Discuss] OSS licenses (was Home NAS redux)
Edward Ned Harvey (blu)
blu at nedharvey.com
Thu Jan 10 13:01:16 EST 2013
> From: Bill Bogstad [mailto:bogstad at pobox.com]
>
> You also keep implying that there are substantial financial benefits
> received by people/entities who attempt to enforce free software
> licenses. I would request that you provide some evidence of this.
> I'm not saying they didn't make some money (I don't know). I'm just
> suggesting that it is not substantial.
No - because I'm sick of this thread too and that's just a tangent. It is also, not what I really care about. (As you obviously agree.)
The point is, Mark, claiming that CDDL is bad and equating CDDL to a lack of freedom, is rubbish. The main difference between CDDL and GPL is whether or not a binary compiled from different-licensed sources needs to be (a) prohibited from distribution, as it is in the GPL, or (b) licensed under the same license.
Mark, where do you draw the line, for a "derivative work?" Static linking? VMDK files? Laptops?
More information about the Discuss
mailing list