On Tue, 27 Feb 2007, Chad Walstrom wrote: > On Tue, Feb 27, 2007 at 10:16:39AM -0600, Mike Miller wrote: > >> One major question unresolved for me: If code is distributed under the >> BSDL and it is used within a proprietary program, does that program >> then have to be distributed under the BSDL? > > No. I'm sorry Chad, but a single word from someone I don't know who goes by the pseudonym "Wookimus" doesn't do it for me. I'd like to read all of this sometime: http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20070114093427179 I don't know Brendan Scott but I have the impression that he is an attorney, and he is certainly an expert on this topic. Here is some info about him: http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20070114093427179#sdfootnote1sym >> Can anyone take the code and change the license? > > Yes. Yet another word. It is having no effect on me. >> Are we allowed to choose a different license for the binary than for >> the source that was used to build it? > > Yes, though Copyright notices must remain in-tact. Full details found > here: > > http://www.opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php Like you, I am not an attorney, but it seems to me that the license shown there requires that "redistributions" stick with the original agreement. I don't see anything about what we might call "relicensing." > The only thing that BSD license does above Public Domain is enforce the > need to give attribution to the original copyright holders. This can > also be done using Creative Commons 3.0 Attribution license, but may > actually stand up to international law. > > http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ If all you want is attribution and not a continuing program of development, an attribution-only license may be the way to go. Mike