Theo de Raadt Responds to Linux Licensing Issues

bsdphx writes "While Theo may have a reputation of being "difficult" in some circles, this response to the recent relicensing controversy is thoughtful and well penned. Through this whole process I've learned some new things about both GPL and BSD licensing, and especially about combining the two."

Comments

Dual licensing interpretations

[Novus]

While I am not a lawyer, it seems to me that Theo is confused about what the dual licence in question actually says. I quote:

Alternatively, this software may be distributed under the terms of the GNU General Public License ("GPL") version 2 as published by the Free Software Foundation.

In other words, the author specifically allows you to distribute provided you meet all the requirements of the GPL and nothing else. Well, the GPL says that you have to license your work under the GPL (see section 2b), which they did. In other words, the wording of this dual licence allows the redistributor to choose one licence or the other and thus remove the dual licensing; Theo is wrong. Of course, Theo is right about removing the BSD licence from code.

Re:Just doesn't make sense

[roman_mir]

*scratches head*

        Your comment misses the point. What Theo claims (and he is right about it) is that by removing the BSD licence you don't contribute back to the BSD project that created the code you took. In other words you are doing just what you claim companies would be doing, because as soon as you put that under the GPL, the BSD project cannot use it anymore.

Right, but the BSD in fact gives you the permission to do this

- BSD does not let you remove the BSD license from the BSD code. Also NO license can supersede the copyright.

BSD allows you to use the code in your own project, your own project can be then redistributed with BSD code in it, however the BSD license cannot be removed from the BSD code. BSD code can be modified but the BSD license cannot be removed from the modified file either. It is not possible to add a new license to a BSD licensed file without permission of the original copyright holders.

However you can take BSD code, add it to your own project and distribute just the binaries of your project without giving any source code to anyone and it is not illegal under BSD. But BSD is a license and it cannot be legally removed from a licensed file.

Re:Hmmm

[MysteriousPreacher]

Bullshit. Read this comment regarding vendors using SSH that Theo posted on one of the OpenSSH mailing lists.

These vendors include:

        Sun Apple IBM HP Cisco Netgear RedHat SuSe

        most operating system vendors except Microsoft

        nearly other major network equipment manufacturer

        (but many other vendors too)

These vendors have never given us even a dime. (To put it more
clearly, IBM loaned one developer a machine to make sure that OpenSSH
would run better on it, but they INSISTED on it being a loan instead
of just giving it to the developer).

http://marc.info/?l=openssh-unix-dev&m=11431622462 7520&w=2

You can't get much direct than that. I suggest you visit the link and read the rest of his mail.