The document discusses the BSD license for open source software. It notes that the BSD license allows for broad usage and distribution of source code as long as copyright notices are retained. Specifically, it outlines the terms of the license and notes that a recent change removed requirements around advertising acknowledgments. In general, the BSD license imposes minimal restrictions, making software usable by both individuals and corporations without political or corporate motives.

1. FEATURE
BSD licensing today - No politics, no pain
By: Pat Lynch
Discussions about licensing are common; just look at the tangents raised in this issue of
Open magazine in the Going Open and Last Rage columns. In all the talk about licensing, however,
people sometimes miss the point of the licenses themselves. Let's look closer to understand the BSD-
style license and the GNU Public License (GPL).
1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the
following disclaimer.
2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and
the following disclaimer in the documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution.
3. All advertising materials mentioning features or use of this software must display the following
acknowledgement: This product includes software developed by the University of California, Berkeley
and its contributors.
4. Neither the name of the University nor the names of its contributors may be used to endorse or
promote products derived from this software without specific prior written permission.
THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE REGENTS AND CONTRIBUTORS AS IS AND ANY
EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE
DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE REGENTS OR CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE FOR
ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL
DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS
OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION)
HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT,
STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY
WAY OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF
SUCH DAMAGE."
Recently, these terms changed:
"July 22, 1999
To All Licensees, Distributors of Any Version of BSD:
As you know, certain of the Berkeley Software Distribution ('BSD') source code require that further
distributions of products containing all or portions of the software, acknowledge within their advertising
materials that such products contain software developed by UC Berkeley and its contributors.
Specifically, the provision reads: ' 3.All advertising materials mentioning features or use of this software
must display the following acknowledgement:' This product includes software developed by the
University of California, Berkeley and its contributors.

2. Effective immediately, licensees and distributors are no longer required to include the acknowledgement
within advertising materials. Accordingly, the foregoing paragraph of those BSD Unix files containing it
is hereby deleted in its entirety.
William Hoskins
Director, Office of Technology Licensing
University of California, Berkeley"
This means you can pretty much do anything with the code under this license except hold the author
responsible. The copyright notice has to appear only in source code that is distributed. Obviously, this is
good for corporate entities who want to modify the source code and distribute the resulting binaries
without giving away their other information.
Market implications? One source suggests that this license makes BSD ripe for use in embedded systems
and Internet appliances, since companies don't have to worry about distributing code. Another person
recently asked me, "What if a company like Microsoft decides to take this code and use it?" Well, if they
find it useful, by the terms of this license, they may use it. At one point they would have been held to the
"advertising clause," but that's no longer true. If you take the Windows "ftp" binary and run the Unix
command "strings," you'll find that BSD code has already been used in Microsoft's product.
There doesn't seem to be any political or corporate motive in the BSD license. There is good reason for
this: BSD developed from the Computing Systems Research Group at the University of California at
Berkeley. A large part of it was developed elsewhere at other research institutions (BSD's first VM
system was derived from Mach's, which was developed at Carnegie Mellon University) and there was no
gain involved, politically or monetarily, from making these sources available to the world. In fact, a large
part of BSD's Open Source culture was that it was made available to people after the suit from AT&T so
that parts to which AT&T held the copyright could be rewritten rather quickly. One could argue that
BSD's Internet development community was one of the first of its kind. Soon after followed something
called Linux.