On Tue, 27 Feb 2007, Chad Walstrom wrote:

> On Tue, Feb 27, 2007 at 10:16:39AM -0600, Mike Miller wrote:
>
>> One major question unresolved for me:  If code is distributed under the 
>> BSDL and it is used within a proprietary program, does that program 
>> then have to be distributed under the BSDL?
>
> No.

I'm sorry Chad, but a single word from someone I don't know who goes by 
the pseudonym "Wookimus" doesn't do it for me.  I'd like to read all of 
this sometime:

http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20070114093427179

I don't know Brendan Scott but I have the impression that he is an 
attorney, and he is certainly an expert on this topic.  Here is some info 
about him:

http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20070114093427179#sdfootnote1sym


>> Can anyone take the code and change the license?
>
> Yes.

Yet another word.  It is having no effect on me.


>> Are we allowed to choose a different license for the binary than for
>> the source that was used to build it?
>
> Yes, though Copyright notices must remain in-tact.  Full details found
> here:
>
> http://www.opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php

Like you, I am not an attorney, but it seems to me that the license shown 
there requires that "redistributions" stick with the original agreement. 
I don't see anything about what we might call "relicensing."


> The only thing that BSD license does above Public Domain is enforce the 
> need to give attribution to the original copyright holders.  This can 
> also be done using Creative Commons 3.0 Attribution license, but may 
> actually stand up to international law.
>
> http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/

If all you want is attribution and not a continuing program of 
development, an attribution-only license may be the way to go.

Mike