Re: [tor-dev] BSD 2/3-Clause License (was: Torperf)

[grarpamp <grarpamp@xxxxxxxxx>]

The only difference between 2 and 3 clause BSD is
the presence of the third clause. So long as you're
not doing what the third clause restricts, they're
compatible. Coordination is still prudent though.

3 clause still exists because some people (mostly legacy entities)
think "endorsement" and "promotion" are worrisome concepts deserving
explicit restriction (as if you could even define them). But that's all
rather moot because they are already implicitly doing E&P for all future
derivative products by forcing them to carry their copyright name
on/within them.

2 clause seems to realize that and is the current default of the
FreeBSD project.


On 9/16/13, Karsten Loesing <karsten@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 9/16/13 2:51 PM, Sathyanarayanan Gunasekaran wrote:
>> I'm currently using BSD 3-Clause License (used by Tor) for torperf2.
>> Kevin ported ooni's setup script and made it work with torperf2, but
>> ooni uses a BSD 2-Clause License (both are copyrighted to The Tor
>> Project). Kevin and I think they are compatible, but I wanted to check
>> in with you before I merged the changes. Thoughts?
>
> I have, honestly, no idea.  Cc'ing tor-dev@ in the hope that someone
> else can answer this question.
>
> All the best,
> Karsten
>
> _______________________________________________
> tor-dev mailing list
> tor-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-dev
>
_______________________________________________
tor-dev mailing list
tor-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-dev