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 | darwin-kernel@lists.apple.com Help/Unsubscribe/Archives: http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/darwin-kernel Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.