> On Tue, 18 Apr 2017 19:39:15 -0600 > "Anthony J. Bentley" <anth...@anjbe.name> wrote: > > Theo de Raadt writes: > >> May I ask what fucking asshole in Japan decided he should override the > >> license of a 20 year old piece of permissively licensed software because > >> his idiology was more important than the heritage he built on?? > > I misunderstood that less v382 maintained by GNU with GPL. Actually > it is still dual license. I'm sorry about this. > > Also the ja-less distribution itself is keeping the dual license.
OK, so it remains 2-term BSD. I think the original has this weird ineffective dual license because someone with a beard cried a lot and made threats. I've seen lots of these kinds of emails. When a 2nd license has restrictions, why would anyone choose it. Like, WTF. Why would they. It is a joke upon choice. If the author actually believed this should be GPL, he would have removed the 2-term BSD, but his software probably would have been replaced by someone else in the community in short order, so he didn't have the balls to do what, and why should he have the balls to do that... instead, he can add GPL to a file and privately laugh at the bearded guy In all cases, I think software should be registered everywhere only as the least restrictive license. (As long as between the two licenses we don't encounter one having a restriction which isn't in the other) 2-term BSD is very permissive. I'm astounded by this situation. Why would anyone choose shackles? The only guy who chooses such shackles is the bearded guy convincing everyone to add this to files he didn't create, and sometimes sign them over to his organization. Obviously that is a scam. The bearded guy is very rich. I invite people to run the numbers.
