Re: Berkeley DB curious licensing practice
On Thursday 31 October 2002 09:57, Bennett Todd wrote:
> 2002-10-28-12:24:21 Alan Shutko:
> > 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.
>
> The new part isn't the above concept, but rather the re-definition
> of "redistribute" to include copying to machines within an
> organization, if they happen to be located at different physical
> sites. Sleepycat is explicitly taking the position that Berkeley DB
> can no longer be used for free within multi-site organizations, that
> even such internal use requires either open sourcing the app, or
> paying a license fee. This is new and different.
>
> I for one am abstaining from using Berkeley DB as best I can.
>
You only have to give the source to the recipient of a binary. This means
that people within the company have the right as part of their job to see the
source. This is no unreasonable and in worse case can be controlled with
NDAs and or management. No huge deal here.
I agree with you on principle though.
Reply to: