Re: GPL misappropriation

[David Kastrup]

RJack <user@example.net> writes:

> David Kastrup wrote:
>> RJack <user@example.net> writes:
>>
>>> I have been poking around in the source code for BusyBox, v.0.60.3.
>>> and unsurprisingly most every thing in the those command line
>>> utilities are substantially similar to the old BSD4.4-lite tree.
>>> Not only are the defendants Best But et. al. not guilty of
>>> infringing Erik Andersen's source code but BusyBox has appropriated
>>>  code from the BSD tree and tried to put it illegally under the
>>> GPL.
>>
>
>
>> You should try rereading that BSD license.  "Appropriating" and
>> releasing under the GPL is perfectly covered by the BSD license as
>> long as the original copyright attributions remain intact.
>
> That will never happen. Copyrights are exclusive rights and cannot be
> licensed by anyone except the *owner* of a copyright.

And the copyright owner licensed them under the BSD license which
permits incorporation into works licensed differently.

> Releasing BSD licensed code under the GPL is simply attempting to
> steal it.

Read the BSD license, joker.

And/or get a clue.  IIRC, even some Windows bootup screen mentions
"contains code (C) BSD" and so on.  And Windows is not exactly
BSD-licensed.

The whole point of the BSD license is that you can incorporate the code
into differently licensed stuff.  As opposed to copyleft.

-- 
David Kastrup