On Sep 17, 2007, at 8:57 AM, Adrian Bunk wrote:

quoted text
> On Mon, Sep 17, 2007 at 11:30:11AM +0200, Henning Brauer wrote:
>> * david@lang.hm <david@lang.hm> [2007-09-17 02:29]:
>>> you claim that it's unethical for the linux community to use the  
>>> code, but
>>> brag about NetApp useing the code. what makes NetApp ok and Linux  
>>> evil?
>>
>> NetApp does not pretend to be free and open and save the world etc
>
> GPL and BSD are two different philosophies of freedom.
>
> Some people (e.g. me) consider the BSD licence a less free licence
> since it doesn't defend that the code stays free.

Sure it does.  My code under BSD license continues to remain free,  
regardless of what Company X(1) does with their *copy* of my code.     
The only restrictions on my code is that copyright and attribution  
must remain intact.  All users of my code have the same rights,  
regardless of what Company X does with their *copy*.

The GPL places additional restrictions on code.  It is therefore less  
free than the BSD.

Free code + restrictions = non-free code.


(1) GPL advocates deep-down really like the BSD license.   
Unfortunately, they keep getting hung up on the idea of the Evil  
Corporation (TM) "stealing" my code.  Nobody has stolen anything.   
That corporation is entitled to the same rights as Joe User.  Neither  
EC or JU are required to redistribute any of their changes to their  
*copy* of my code.  They are only required to keep attribution  
intact.  Does that make MY CODE any less free?  OF COURSE NOT!

---
Jason Dixon
DixonGroup Consulting
http://www.dixongroup.net