Re: [tlug] RE: Response to pretty much all the copy right and liscense posts in the last who knows how long.

["Josh Glover" <jmglov@example.com>]

On 08/01/07, burlingk@example.com <burlingk@example.com> wrote:

> For a not-so-strong-copy-left-protected license that is still very
> stable, answers a lot of questions in a reasonable manner, but is sure
> to agitate the die hard GPL people, BSD License version 1.0.  :P  Yes,
> the old one.  I kinda like it.

The BSD licence is not a copyleft licence, at least as far as I
understand the term.

The only different between BSD-1 and BSD-2 is the advertising clause,
which required that the names of *all* major contributors be listed in
all promotional material for software derived from BSD-licenced code.
You can imagine how unwieldy that has gotten. BSD-2 removed that
clause, and thus became functionally equivalent to the MIT licence,
under which XFree86 was released.

-Josh