Forwarded because I forgot to hit reply-to-all.<br><br>---------- Forwarded message ----------<br><span class="gmail_quote">From: <b class="gmail_sendername">Jesper Louis Andersen</b> <<a href="mailto:jesper.louis.andersen@gmail.com">
jesper.louis.andersen@gmail.com</a>><br>Date: May 15, 2007 10:48 PM<br>Subject: Re: [MLton-user] Is mlton free software?<br>To: Bartlomiej Szymczak <<a href="mailto:rhywek@gmail.com">rhywek@gmail.com</a>><br><br>
</span>It is very close to the original 44BSD license. see<br><br><a href="http://www.freebsd.org/copyright/license.html" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">http://www.freebsd.org/copyright/license.html
</a><br><br>However: The 4th clause in that license (the non-advertising clause)
<br>is the problematic one versus GPL-compatibility and the<br>one mentioned as problematic in the FSF list. You will note that<br>such a clause is part of the MLton license.<br><br>Parts of the FreeBSD source is still under the 44BSD license, though
<br>all new work is under a 2-clause license (delete statement 3 and 4) See<br><br><a href="http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/COPYRIGHT?rev=1.8" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/COPYRIGHT?rev=1.8</a><br><br>
for further elaboration.<br><br>The license used by MLton has a clause stating that the<br>license itself must be included in derived works. In other words,<br>you have to give credit to the original project. You are free to fork
<br>the project and create your own, closed, version as long as you<br>retain the copyright notice and license file.<br><br>Does this thing happen in the real world? Yes. Juniper networks sells<br>routers based on an old fork of FreeBSD. Ciscos IOS include(d/s) a malloc()
<br>implementation from FreeBSD. Several vendors has taken the OpenSSH<br>code and used it. Is this bad? It depends on your personal views.<br><br>A scheme I've often seen regards a BSD-style license is that the developers
<br>are contracted to do some work. It is then the case that the constructed code<br>is released to the world under a BSD-license, while the company forks it at once<br>and takes the software in the direction they want in a closed style. This makes for
<br>an extremely easy monetization oppurtunity. Partial BSD-license releases are also<br>seen.<br><br>A variant of the scheme is actually seen with a dual GPL/Proprietary licensing scheme. See<br>Troll Tech in Norway and MySQL AB in Sweden. You can get the GPL-version, but if you
<br>want more rights, you must pay. Again, the scheme depends on personal views.<br><br>