Quoting Mike Milinkovich (mike.milinkovich@eclipse.org):

> So my conclusion at this point is that the term "...asymmetrical corporate
> licenses..." is being interpreted by many to mean those licenses which
> explicitly allow third parties to build commercial products on top of open
> source.

Plainly not, since BSD is specifically disclaimed as being such (by
Bruce, at least).

I suspect the intended reference was to asymmetric reservations of rights
a la NPL.  Some concern over ambiguity (and the probably unintended slur
against the MPL community) is obviously warranted, but the recent
Chicken Little theatrics from certain quarters -- e.g., Prof. West,
originator of this subject header -- is not.