Re: AW: License proposal

Jacob Kjome <[email protected]> wrote:

>> With BSD, you basically have zero say in what happens to the code,
>> downstream.
>
> Exactly.
>
> Imagine a scenario where some company takes the Barracuda code, forks
> it,
With BSD there must always remain a copyright notice (and permission notice)
in all(!) subsequent copies and versions.

> calls it "Subverta", markets the hell out of it, and it starts to
> gain mindshare.  Now the Barracuda project is left holding the bag
> because it is incompatible with the heavily marketed Subverta product
> and who want to waste time with an incompatible version of a popular
> software package?
So what? It's not the problem in BSD license it's a question of what your
project is. If a new project arises and its definitely better than Barracuda
although it is derived from Barracuda then the Barracuda community had
missed something which they should have done better. The better one should
win. But how possible is a situation like that? Anyway, the BSD makes sure
that you know where code originates from. And yes, the argument of sometimes
hated Bill Gates is true here: many Open Source Licenses curb innovation.

BSD is really the most open license. And as I recently told Christian: Less
is more!

Regards,
Thorsten