Subject: Re: "University-style" vs "Berkeley" licenses
From: Rich Morin <rdm@cfcl.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1998 15:49:47 -0700

>While I would prefer that the language weren't there, this isn't correct.
>The statement says "mentioning features or use".  You only have to give
>notice if you specifically mention features that you obtained from
>elsewhere.  Sure, some folks simply do a laundry list, but only because
>it's simpler and they don't want to bother actually thinking about it.

Yes, it is conditional, but it is still a !@#$ nuisance.  Let's say that
I want to create an advertisement that mentions the inclusion of several
packages, including 4.4BSD-Lite.  With this restriction, I'm forced to
put in an explanatory note for each one.  This is a hassle and one that
I see as quite unnecessary.

-r

P.S.  Speaking of unnecessary drivel, of course, there's always the GNU
      announcements that the GPL recommends for all interactive programs.
      I mean, do I really need to be told whose program I'm running,
      every time I invoke it  Jeez!

Rich Morin, Canta Forda Computer Laboratory | Prime Time Freeware - quality
  UNIX consulting, training, and writing    | freeware at affordable prices
  P.O. Box 1488, Pacifica, CA, 94044, USA   | www.ptf.com      info@ptf.com
  rdm@cfcl.com            +1 650-873-7841   | +1 408-433-9662   -0727 (Fax)