My understanding is that: MIT-licensed projects can be used/redistributed in BSD-licensed projects. BSD-licensed projects can be used/redistributed in MIT-licensed projects. The MIT and the BSD ...
Note: This question is not about the "obnoxious BSD advertising clause". The New BSD license does not contain that clause, and is compatible with the GPL. I'm trying to pick between the New BSD ...
Can I develop a BSD-licensed software that extends an Apache-licensed software (and vice-versa)?
Suppose I release some source code under the new BSD license. Is it allowed for someone else to take this code, make modifications to it and distribute it under the terms of the GPL? From Wikipedia: ...
Today I read on Fossil SCM's mailing list: The problem with BSD is that you really should get a signed form from each contributor stating that their contribution is BSD. This is automatic with ...
What is the difference between releasing code under the BSD license and releasing it as public domain?
You are free to use BSD licensed code for anything, even commercial, closed source software. How is that any different than just releasing it as public domain?
I was wondering if this license is: self defeating just a clone of an existing, better established license practical any more "corporate-friendly" than the GPL too vague/open ended and finally, if ...
I have downloaded a currently inactive GPL project with a view to updating it and releasing the completed codebase as open source. I'm not really a fan of GPL though and would rather licence my ...
I'm developing a non-free library and I want to use Bcrypt.Net in it. The clause in question: Neither the name of BCrypt.Net nor the names of its contributors may be used to endorse or promote ...