Comments on: Is the BSD license more liberal or conservative than the GPL? http://securityblog.org/brindle/2008/04/11/is-the-bsd-license-more-liberal-or-conservative-than-the-gpl/ The ramblings of security neophyte Joshua Brindle Wed, 30 Jun 2010 13:49:45 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9 hourly 1 By: Tea Party Latest http://securityblog.org/brindle/2008/04/11/is-the-bsd-license-more-liberal-or-conservative-than-the-gpl/comment-page-1/#comment-49391 Tea Party Latest Mon, 12 Apr 2010 03:17:40 +0000 http://securityblog.org/brindle/2008/04/11/is-the-bsd-license-more-liberal-or-conservative-than-the-gpl/#comment-49391 appreciated this article! appreciated this article!

]]> By: Jeff Schroeder http://securityblog.org/brindle/2008/04/11/is-the-bsd-license-more-liberal-or-conservative-than-the-gpl/comment-page-1/#comment-28175 Jeff Schroeder Fri, 11 Apr 2008 21:13:22 +0000 http://securityblog.org/brindle/2008/04/11/is-the-bsd-license-more-liberal-or-conservative-than-the-gpl/#comment-28175 Now are you referring to to traditional "4 clause" BSD license or a more relaxed 3 clause BSD license? There is a big difference between the two. The original BSD license has a mandatory requirement for attribution of copyright. Read this and the two paragraphs below for a very good explanation: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BSD_license#UC_Berkeley_advertising_clause The original 4 clause BSD license is not gpl compatible because the gpl has no attribution requirement. (Ironic huh?). If you want a truly liberal license, the MIT license is more liberal than the BSD license. It allows you to do even more and is basicly public domain. The "Simplified BSD License" is pretty much the same as the MIT license. With all of that being said, the 3 clause BSD or MIT style license are both great choices. http://www.opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.php http://www.opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php Now are you referring to to traditional “4 clause” BSD license or a more relaxed 3 clause BSD license? There is a big difference between the two. The original BSD license has a mandatory requirement for attribution of copyright.

Read this and the two paragraphs below for a very good explanation:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BSD_license#UC_Berkeley_advertising_clause

The original 4 clause BSD license is not gpl compatible because the gpl has no attribution requirement. (Ironic huh?).

If you want a truly liberal license, the MIT license is more liberal than the BSD license. It allows you to do even more and is basicly public domain. The “Simplified BSD License” is pretty much the same as the MIT license.

With all of that being said, the 3 clause BSD or MIT style license are both great choices.

http://www.opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.php
http://www.opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php

]]> By: Chad Sellers http://securityblog.org/brindle/2008/04/11/is-the-bsd-license-more-liberal-or-conservative-than-the-gpl/comment-page-1/#comment-28173 Chad Sellers Fri, 11 Apr 2008 20:31:26 +0000 http://securityblog.org/brindle/2008/04/11/is-the-bsd-license-more-liberal-or-conservative-than-the-gpl/#comment-28173 According to my dictionary here, the first definition of liberal is "open to new behavior or opinions and willing to discard traditional values." As the BSD license if more open to different opinions than the GPL (which forces its users to comply with its own opinions), I'd say the BSD license is more liberal than the GPL. According to my dictionary here, the first definition of liberal is “open to new behavior or opinions and willing to discard traditional values.” As the BSD license if more open to different opinions than the GPL (which forces its users to comply with its own opinions), I’d say the BSD license is more liberal than the GPL.

]]>