Re: Reading BSD-2 carefully
Hi,
Le samedi 31 janvier 2026 à 17:19 +0100, Marek Mosiewicz a écrit :
> First Debian contains BSD licensed packages so it also matters.
>
> Second Linux kernel is GPL licensed which is copyleft license.
>
> My observation is that BSD license could be also consdiered
>
> copyleft in sense that it guarantees that you do not need
>
> to pay for it . MIT licese allows you to sell it but BSD
>
> do not allow it. It even do not allow binary form to require be paid
>
> opposite to GPLs. The only difference is that GPL force distributor
> to
> provide
>
> source code while BSD do not require it. From one perspective it
> could
>
> be consdier worse, but I had experiece of distributing modified by me
> MPL
>
> code which also has that kind of obligation and I got sick and did
> not
>
> done backup, so I did not comply.
>
> Third I cosndier debian mailing list readers interesting locutors.
You seem to be confusing free as-in-freedom and free as-in-unpaid, and
you should really make the distinction ; but this is no place to
discuss it : I suggest you move your discussion to the debian-legal
mailing list instead of debian-devel.
Cheers,
J.Puydt
Reply to: