license/licensing

The purpose of a file-based non-viral, copyleft work copy license, would be to preserve freedom of code throughout forks and variations, while further preserving freedom of use outside of code outside of this directory. Freedom for use of code would be preserved, because when a derivative or...

We have lots of licenses in the Open Source / Free Software world. CDDL, GNU GPL v.1/2/3, BSD, MIT, and more. Even QT Company has its own licenses that dictate what you may or may not do with their software. And those licenses do have purposes - like controlling the extent of plagiarism, making...

There have been debates about which licenses or license types are best for preserving opensource freedom. I believe file-based weak copyleft licenses are exceptional. The purpose would be keeping code separate, while allowing use in some form. Dynamic linking is enough for most purposes, which...

I'm building a new application in C (not specifically for FreeBSD), and I would like to use a BSD-3-Clause or BSD-2-Clause license (I'm still trying to figure out if 3 clause is even worth it?), but I'm very picky about the differences between the FreeBSD license and the SPDX license as seen...

I would like to get some clarification on FreeBSD driver licensing and what is permissible. Lets say I want to contribute a driver for INA3221 under the most permissive license. BSD-2 clause. What is the critera for looking at other licensed code. Is it allowed at all? No copying obviously...

What's the difference between GPLv2,GPLv3,apache,bsd,Lgpl ? Is it important

Inspired by another thread, I remembered something I have in mind for quite some time now: It seems we all have different opinions about what "free software" actually means. Among BSD users, I kind of expect the BSD licenses to "win" such a poll. Still I'm interested in comments. When exactly...

Apache 2.0 isn't compatible with GPL2, because of patent and infringement differences. LGPL2 also has mention of these terms, so I don't expect Apache 2.0 to compatible with it either. Apache 2.0 is determined compatible with GPL3. Of note, LGPL3 doesn't have mention of infringement and patents...

Mozilla Public License (MPL) 2.0 is more than about Mozilla created software. The Mozilla Foundation is a steward of its licenses also intended for use in software development by other authors. It's similar to how the Apache Foundation is a strong backer of its current license. Mozilla Public...

Hey folks, i'm an absolute novice when it comes to freebsd. never installed the base OS. my experience with it is through pfsense. that will change in time however (meaning, when resources become available, i will set up a freebsd box to learn on). that being said. BSD is incredible. Hats...

Marak Squires is the author of two well known and used libraries on NPM, colors and faker. colors gets 20 million downloads a week with 19.000 projects relying on it, while faker has 2.8 million weekly downloads and 2.500 dependants. Suddenly users were startled, because programs using these...

I did use GPL code in my software and was forced to release it as GPL, too. But the programming language I use doesn't have it own compiler but it first compile to intermediate C code and relying on GCC to produce the binary. The intermediate C code is completely unreadable by human. I don't...

I am looking at the differences between GPL and BSD - does it matter if the program language is GPL if you wanted to release a project as BSD license? I wanted to use Java; however, the great Oracle has me second guessing that choice. Python, I think... has a BSD like license that is compatible...

Folks, I have a difficulty in understanding some licence requirements. For Berkeley it appears to be simple: you can do everything. For GPL, as far as I understood, you are required to publish any further developments again under the original GPL license. But, as I thought, plainly running...

I am interested in using only BSD licensed software for my routers and software switches. Problem is my favorite DHCP server is dns/dnsmasq but it uses a GPL license. ISC DHCP server no longer uses the ISC license, which was compatible with BSD/MIT style license. But the problem is that ISC DHCP...

The GNU / FSF project also has its own permissive license Perhaps few or none know it but the GNU / Free Software Foundation project also has its own permissive license although they do not give much importance just to mention it is similar to the BSD license, the license is called...

Something I would like to know is if FreeBSD disagrees with the FSF or it is simply a matter of licensing not to use tools such as GCC, Bash among many by default, I really do not understand it because if GCC like Bash is free software and open source like Tcsh, csh or ksh I suppose it must be...

Hello, Why aren't more universities using open source? This interesting topic of discussion is an extension, for universities, why open source is not sufficiently employed. Have fun in this interesting discussion. Best regards, Sp. Ref. https://opensource.com/article/17/6/open-source-research

Article itself What would be the resulting effect for FreeBSD? Stuck again on particular LLVM version for years to come?

The objective of the 'Dæmon License' is to create a license completely and clearly incompatible, directly and indirectly, with the COPYLEFT philosophy. Beyond personal convictions, a possible use would be for the corporation XYZ willing to open some random code to be improved community-wise but...