Re: [libesmtp-devel] Licence issues for libESMTP (and Balsa) - long (was Re: NTLM authentication)

[Carlos Morgado <chbm chbm nu>]

On 2002.01.10 13:27:41 +0000 Ali Akcaagac wrote:
> On Thu, 2002-01-10 at 14:11, Matthias Andree wrote:
> > > As i said, I don't think openbsd taints a lgpl binary
> >
> > OpenSSL has an advertising clause which may later become a problem.
> > Effectively, you'd probably not be able to link GPLed stuff against
> > OpenSSL.
> 
> heh,
> 
> how comes that whenever i listen to OpenSSL related discussions it ends
> in the same situation. well i remember that evolution people have the
> same issues with the OpenSSL package. i don't get why the person who
> creates OpenSSL decides for such a stupid licensing modell if no one
> else is able getting their shit compiled against that stuff because of
> licensing violations. to say this really pisses me off.
> 
because they:
a) shield themselfs saying openssl is a system lib (only the distros can
  claim this)
b) want to make money from licensing the openssl name

-- 
Carlos Morgado - chbm(at)chbm(dot)nu - http://chbm.nu/ -- gpgkey: 0x1FC57F0A
http://wwwkeys.pgp.net/ FP:0A27 35D3 C448 3641 0573 6876 2A37 4BB2 1FC5 7F0A
Software is like sex; it's better when it's free. - Linus Torvalds