[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: GPL misappropriation

From: RJack
Subject: Re: GPL misappropriation
Date: Tue, 04 May 2010 16:09:41 -0000
User-agent: Thunderbird (Windows/20100228)

David Kastrup wrote:
RJack <> writes:

David Kastrup wrote:
RJack <> 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.

No matter what you say or how many time you say it, BSD licensed code
remains under the BSD license and not the GPL license.

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.

Incorporate away DAK -- all you want -- still, BSD licensed code remains
under the BSD license and not the GPL license.

RJack :)

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]