Re: Theo de Raadt on Relicensing BSD Code (mod -3/41)
by Anonymous Coward (126.96.36.199) on Sat Sep 15 02:09:48 2007 (GMT)
OSS competition is rough at all levels, expect and demand proactive measures, nothing new.
The OpenBSD team is thankfully a leader with proactive measures for BSD OSS. I'm starting to build my IT legal knowledge.
IANAL, IANetc, but trademark law was used by Redhat lawyers with Enterprise Linux to ~stifle CentOS, a RHEL clone, through Redhat notices or references. I'm open to interpretation on the RHEL and CentOS matter, but is BSD code hampered under trademark law as well, and under what constraints? Sure would be nice to have a FAQ FGA list for many of these matters. More legal work ahead, grr, teeth pulling, and slows down my IT learning.
BSD code might need its own legal eagles, like the FSF, something that OpenBSD is doing thankfully. However, legal matters seems to be a dedicated fight, much like coding is. I just hope BSD code gets it legal representation it deserves. I am uncertain how much the FSF protects BSD, perhaps I'll research the FSF more.
Any comments on the above, I'd be interested in.
[ Show thread ] [ Reply to this comment ] [ Mod Up ] [ Mod Down ]
Add Story |
Copyright © 2004-2008
All rights reserved.
Articles and comments are copyright their respective authors,
submission implies license to publish on this web site.
Contents of the archive prior to April 2nd 2004 as well as images
and HTML templates were copied from the fabulous original
Jim's kind permission.
Some icons from slashdot.org
used with permission from Kathleen.
This journal runs as CGI with
on OpenBSD, the
source code is
Search engine is ht://Dig.
undeadly \Un*dead"ly\, a. Not subject to death; immortal. [Obs.]