Eiffel Forum License

[David Johnson]

On Sun, 30 Apr 2000, Rod Dixon, J.D., LL.M. wrote:

> I have not read the BSD licenses in a while, but I know that the FSF/Richard
> Stallman argues that they have no copyleft provision.
> ...
> Consequently, I think this is a rather appropriate time to discuss
> the BSD and other public licenses.

I have heard the BSD (as well as MIT) license classified before in two
ways. The first is as an "unrestricted" license as opposed to
"copyleft". Basically, there are no restrictions except for those that
are legally prudent, such as keeping a copy of the permission and
warranty disclaimer with the software. They are only a couple of steps
away from public domain. They continue to assert the author's
copyrights.

The second classification I have heard is that it is a "defensive"
license. This was explained to me as a way to keep the warranty
disclaimer attached to the software. Apparently, authors of public
domain software can still be held liable for damages, particularly in
our modern litigious society. By keeping minimal ownership rights over
the software, they can ensure that every user of the software receives
the disclaimer.

-- 
David Johnson...
_____________________________
http://www.usermode.org