On 01/30/2011 08:25 AM, Ashish Bhatia wrote: > Where did I said that? > The closest statement to this I can find is "BSD based code is heavily > used by major companies." > And yes, I do stand by it. The reason being the GPL compliance is > tough for most companies to comply to > due to permissive nature, derivative work based on BSD code is more prevalent.
Citation needed. You will likely find that GPL code usage far outweighs any other license in any actual surveys. > The complete statement is "Avoid BSD/MIT and use Apache instead (since > Apache is legally more explicit)." > IMHO, Apache is better than BSD/MIT because > 1. Legally more elaborate > 2. explicitly grants patent rights where necessary to operate, modify > and distribute the software. I think pitching one license as better than the other without taking into consideration the differing goals they serve is fraught with problems. Google happens to be a big advocate of the Apache license however when releasing libvpx (reference implementation of WebM), they choose to release it under BSD license and keep the patent grant as a separate document. The advantage in that BSD is a very simple license and compatible with more licenses than Apache license is (Apache is incompatible with GPLv2 for instance). In other words, whether a license is better or not depends on the goals. Rahul _______________________________________________ ILUGC Mailing List: http://www.ae.iitm.ac.in/mailman/listinfo/ilugc
