Maximal: A New Open-Source License...

[Paradox Ethereal]

You actually typed that and believed that to be something good? You are joke, mindless..

[randomizer]

You have no case.

Oh but I do, you just missed it. Here, let me make it easy for you: http://phoronix.com/forums/showthrea...381#post261381

[Paradox Ethereal]

You have no case. You learnt that phrase on TV. How much are you even aware of reality? Go into Islam, don`t become sectarians, derive your religion from the Quran, and maybe in 10 years you will understand.

Peace be with You.

[randomizer]

I rest my case.

[Paradox Ethereal]

-- outdated.

[randomizer]

Yeah, one of the "do-gooders". Whom I know satan himself feels repulsion against.

I don't think satan takes issue with your toxic attitude towards every person who replies to you.

[Paradox Ethereal]

The rest of you obviously have problems understanding this simple concept. There is no reasonable thinking here, just bimbos babbling. So, yes, I do calculate some loss, and instead consider my public those who CAN understand.

[Paradox Ethereal]

Oh, you're one of those people.

Yeah, one of the "do-gooders".

[XorEaxEax]

If someone licences their code under a permissive licence such as BSD/MIT and similar they are fully aware that it can be brought into a proprietary project and enhanced without those enhancements being contributed back, BUT they are obviously ok with this since if they weren't they would use other licences (like GPL) which does require source code to be contributed back (if distributed that is).

Bottom line is that there is no perfect licence, since it's all up to individuals to decide under which licence they want to publish their open source code and as always we have different preferences, which is why discussions like these are pretty much pointless and generally just end up confirming Godwin's law. It's up to the author of the code to decide under which conditions other people can use it, the rest of us can can choose to accept these terms or leave it be.

[randomizer]

D00d you are missing the point. The code is no longer opensource. Did you even read anything I wrote?

The code may not be open source after it has been modified but that doesn't change the fact that the BSD licence itself is still an open source licence (according to the OSI definition of "open source"). To say otherwise would mean that there must be some contention about the definition of "open source", even though your Maximal licence assumes that there isn't.