On Tue, Mar 11, 2003 at 03:46:05PM -0800, Terry Hancock wrote: > I don't want to ruffle their feathers by making them consider all the license > details -- I'd like to just say "BSD license" or some appropriate standard > that they can live with. They could, of course, sell the software to someone > else, but the usual caveats about selling free software (i.e. you can be > easily undersold) apply. That might be valuable to them if they wanted to > build significantly on it, though.
The only way you get this is if you require that the software remain free: that they not be able to add a bit of non-free code to it, and add restrictions prohibiting further redistribution. The only way you'll get that is with a copyleft, not with a BSD-ish license. That is, the caveats you're referring to are caveats of copylefted software, not of free software in general. -- Glenn Maynard
