[Simh] Pontus asks Is [the] BSD [license] liberal enough?

[Pontus Pihlgren]

On Sat, Jun 06, 2015 at 08:08:29PM -0400, Clem Cole wrote:

> ​Without getting into the good/bad politics of the different 
> license its pretty simple.

I'd also like to avoid a good/bad discussion. I too use both.

> The GPL is a "virus" which says that if you use the 
> technology, a ny "derivitive work" ​ is not yours exclusively, ​ 
> you must be willing to give the sources to not only the 
> original but your work anyone that asks for it.  This means 
> that if you use the technology you have to provide a way for 
> people to get your source code.

I believe there is a missconception here, perhaps on my part. 
But the license is a issued by one party to one other.

Lets call the issuer A and the other B.

If A gives B a software product under GPL then A must provide 
source code to B upon request. B has no obligations to anyone,
not even if B modifies the code.

A third party, lets call them C, has no rights to the product or 
source, it's just when B gives the product to C that the 
restrictions apply. And even then B has no obligations to A. Any 
modifications made by B is only available to C upon request.

GPL is a license to "protect" the user.

/P