sön 2003-05-11 klockan 19.28 skrev David Neary: > In addition, since the GPL itself contains an advertising clause, > in so far as it obliges a certain header in GPL protected source > files, I don't see how it can consider this reason for an > incompatibility with the BSD type licence. The crucial difference is probably that the original BSD license, to my understanding, requires advertising not only in source files, but in all sorts of packaging, both digital and physical. A distributor is required to print the stuff on the box, etc. > I think that we can > keep most of the advertising clauses and still be fully GPL > compliant, in word and in spirit. > > The BSD/Artistic/Apache type licences all permit relicencing, so > why not just relicence to GPL, and keep the advertising clause as > originally requested? It is an additional restriction and thus clearly deemed incompatible with the GPL (http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#OrigBSD). Additional restrictions are not allowed. > If someone can give me a decent explanation why the advertising > clause is a limitation on the liberty to modify the software, I'd > like to hear it. Otherwise, none of this code will cause me to > lose any sleep. It's still free software. It's just not compatible with the GPL. Christian
