> Forwarded message:
> > From quinlan@yggdrasil.com Mon Jul 3 16:10:24 1995
> >
> > I understand the intent behind the Apache license, but I feel that other
> > licenses may do a better job of legally protecting the Apache Group and
> > keep the price low. One license that would accomplish the same goal is
> > the GNU General Public License, which also prevents proprietary extensions
> > of software from becoming not free.
I'm no legal expert, and I don't even understand all of the GPL,
but from other discussions, I get the feeling that it introduces many
headaches, and that a BSD/UCB-style copyright would be a better idea.
GPL wants to be the exclusive licensing agreement, so if you include
any GPL source code in your product, everythign else that ships with
it must also fall under GPL. Or something silly like that. That may
become a factor if Apache incorporates code under different copyrights
and distribution agreements.
--
Brian ("Though this be madness, yet there is method in't") Tao
taob@gate.sinica.edu.tw <-- work ........ play --> taob@io.org