[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Berkeley DB curious licensing practice

On Monday 28 October 2002 09:24, Alan Shutko wrote:
> Toni Mueller <toni@debian.org> writes:
> > the DFSG demands that the license must allow free redistribution
> > and use, ignorant of any specific circumstances. That's imho
> > covered by clause 6 of the rules.
> It seems that this new clause makes the license similar to the GPL.
> You can redistribute BDB alone however you want.  If you are
> redistributing it with an application, the app has to be open
> source.

I just took the time to actually read the website the initial poster pointed 

Alan, you are correct this reads a lot like the GPL and for most companies 
will have a similar impact (usually none).

Bennett, this basically says if you give someone this program you have to give 
them the source.  If you are distributing a program within a company this is 
not a problem and I do not see why they even bother noting it on their page.  
If you give XYZ program to your NOC in say the Netherlands they should not 
need the source but if they ask for it there is likely to be little problem 
with getting them access to it.

Remember, you can create a derived work from a GPL program and give it to 
every person in your company they are the ONLY people who have the right to 
ask for source code.  The GPL only gives rights people who have possession of 
a binary.

Reply to: