GPL and BSD are perfectly compatible. To the point someone decides to steal the code, close it down and start charging upon it. This is protection of freedom: to tolerate all, except those who doesn?t tolerate freedom is GPL main advantage and protection. Yeah, GPL protects freedom, not only declares it. And in event someone wants to sell the code, he is free to dual-license it as special case. And again, in such case he will benefit the original creator, he won?t just get away with stealing. And for the cases someone wants to share to the point of do-anything-you-want, he gives it in public domain. The license text will be cut anyway and code obfuscated, so BSD makes no difference.
Using educational centers as pets to empower their local research subdivision. Giving only portions of code back and separating it (by amount of effort and time needed to learn, by design, by market share, by patents) so that students actually learn and advance proprietary parts instead of collaborating with commercial sector on completely open basis.
Slave 2nd class sheep feeding aristocratic wolves. Deanjo, you?re using and working for Apple. Why not *BSD? Cause *BSD is not good for desktop. And it cannot be done better for desktop, cause Apple doesn?t give much away, following their (BSD) license. Yet Apple took whole whoop of technology from them, for free. Professors carrying out development of their own system, on their own; sometimes getting pieces from the table and dreaming to work elsewhere. Awesome Sounds a lot like ReactOS, but in unix way
You claimed I benefited from it in linux, you surely mean CUPS etc. But, don?t you claimed some months ago that CUPS sucks in linux? Cause, yes it prints, but it is hardly usable: the network functionality is not a problem - the problem is drivers, and CUPS or its license does not change anything. Kodak for example, does MacOSX drivers, but completely ignores linux. I?m proud to use HP <3, but yes I use alternative ink.