Re: Request for a license change

SM wrote:
> Hi Murray,
> At 10:45 17-03-10, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:

>
> I would like to hear other views before taking a stance on the license
> change. I am aware that the four-clause BSD license is considered as
> obnoxious. if I am not mistaken, Fedora permits a package which has a
> 4-clause BSD license.
>

OK

>> (Four-clause BSD contains a term that says if you use our code in your
>> project or product, you have to give us credit for it. The UC Regents
>> dropped this clause some time ago, yielding the three-clause BSD
>> license which is apparently directly compatible with the GPL.)
>
> It actually says that if you mention features or use of this software in
> your advertisements, you need to display an acknowledgement.
>
>> Since we've been in operation less than a year and dkim-milter still
>> gets the majority of the download traffic, I think it would be
>> unfortunate to give up that license term unless there was some larger
>> benefit to the project by getting into the Fedora RPM base.
>
> An acknowledgement attributes the effort to the people who did the
> work. It can also be a way for the project to be more visible.

I'm the author of some "free" software and sometimes I'm being
critisized by some "open source frees software purists". My software is
free (no strings attached), but the only thing I ask is if it's
redistributed or used to provide services, that it should be clearly
stated and advertised. I never asked someone to pay for it, I just have
a book list at amazon, but in three or four years, just a single user
bought and sent me a book.

IMHO, the main, primary goal of open source free software was to create
an alternative to proprietary software who were (and still are) sold at
very high prices and maintaining the user tied and dependent. Other
reasons come after this idea.

It seems to me that it's a basic ethical and moral duty to acknowledge
the work of someone if you use it or if you include it, without any fee,
in your products

This is even more true for companies such as RedHat, which package and
sells the work made for other people.

So, I don't see why someone with good intentions could ask for the right
to hide the name of the original product.

Also, there is an interesting paper written by Richard Stallman about
all this, in the June 2009 issue of the Communications of the ACM :

Why "Open Source" Misses the point of Free Software.

        http://mags.acm.org/communications/200906/?pg=35

Regards,

José-Marcio

--