Re: BSDish licenses without explicit modification permission
On Sat, Jul 6, 2019 at 1:55 AM Paul Wise wrote:
> Does anyone have any thoughts about this?
I talked to one of RedHat's lawyers and they mentioned that they have
dealt with this problem too and concluded that these licenses were
intended to cover modification. The current wording of the initial
part of the BSD license reflects an attempt to correct an earlier
mistake (i.e. someone pointed out the error and Berkeley added "with
or without modification"). Also note that the anti-endorsement clause
implies a right to modify.