Re: [OT?] BSD licensing
Re: [OT?] BSD licensing
- Subject: Re: [OT?] BSD licensing
- From: Brian Bergstrand <email@hidden>
- Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2002 12:06:51 -0500
At 12:40 PM -0400 4/24/02, Adam Atlas wrote:
It seems that Darwin is one of the few (the only?) BSD-derived
operating system that does not use the BSD License. I downloaded the
4.4BSD-Lite sources (Darwin is based on 4.4BSD-Lite, right?) and it
comes with a copy of the BSD License. And the BSD License says that
any product derived from it, in source or binary form, must include
that license. How did Apple get around that?
Actually, Darwin is currently derived from NetBSD and FreeBSD 3.x. If
you look at the source code, all of the BSD derived code contains the
BSD license. Also, if you look at the Mac OS X documentation booklet
(all 20 pages of it), the BSD license is re-printed in the last few
pages.
I though 4.4BSD-Lite was in the public domain, but I guess I'm wrong.
Actually, you are wrong. If BSD-Lite was in the public domain, then
Apple would be within their rights not to include the BSD license.
Public domain means that no one entity owns the copyright to the
work. BSD is not public domain, it is a copyrighted work. Hence the
need for the license.
HTH.
--
Brian Bergstrand
<
http://www.classicalguitar.net/brian/> PGP Key ID: 0xB6C7B6A2
Let the chips fall where they may, but when the alcohol wears off
tomorrow there's going to be one hell of a mess to clean up. - David
Muench
_______________________________________________
darwin-kernel mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives:
http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/darwin-kernel
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.