[Discuss] OSS licenses (was Home NAS redux)

[blu at nedharvey.com (Edward Ned Harvey (blu))]

> From: Bill Bogstad [mailto:bogstad at pobox.com]
> 
> You also keep implying that there are substantial financial benefits
> received by people/entities who attempt to enforce free software
> licenses.   I would request that you provide some evidence of this.
> I'm not saying they didn't make some money (I don't know).   I'm just
> suggesting that it is not substantial.

No - because I'm sick of this thread too and that's just a tangent.  It is also, not what I really care about.  (As you obviously agree.)

The point is, Mark, claiming that CDDL is bad and equating CDDL to a lack of freedom, is rubbish.  The main difference between CDDL and GPL is whether or not a binary compiled from different-licensed sources needs to be (a) prohibited from distribution, as it is in the GPL, or (b) licensed under the same license.

Mark, where do you draw the line, for a "derivative work?"  Static linking?  VMDK files?  Laptops?