# License of Freebsd



## Lobster (Dec 9, 2008)

I dont understend GNU, GPL y etc, can sambody tell what should i do (buy pay etc) to use FreeBSD at:

1 - at home
2 - at web server 
3 - at office (with Samba)


----------



## Djn (Dec 9, 2008)

Both the BSD license (that FreeBSD itself uses) and the GPL (that many programs you might install will use) allow you to use these programs for anything you want, without paying anyone.

The tradeoff is that if it breaks, no one is legally responsible.


----------



## SirDice (Dec 9, 2008)

1) nothing
2) nothing
3) nothing


----------



## Oko (Dec 9, 2008)

Djn said:
			
		

> Both the BSD license (that FreeBSD itself uses) and the GPL (that many programs you might install will use) allow you to use these programs for anything you want, without paying anyone.
> 
> The tradeoff is that if it breaks, no one is legally responsible.



That is VERY simplistic view. In reality there are HUGE difference between academic style licenses (4 clause BSD license, BSD three clause license, MIT, Stanford Software Agreement) vs various forms of GPL licenses vs commercial license (CDDL, Apache, IBM public license) vs Public domain.

I am surprised that you can give such authoritative respond. Do you have a law degree? The proper answer to original question can be given only by layers based upon information regarding the use of the software in question. For home user the answer is probably that everything is free to use but that is were the buck stops. If you want to thinker with some pieces of the software you might be breaking the law.

In general FreeBSD kernel is released under BSD three clause license, Xorg is released under MIT license except OpenGL which is released under some version of GPL (the difference 
between the versions are HUGE and very important).
Groff the part of the base is GPL. Samba is some version of GLP.
web-server is Apache license if he uses 2.0 Apache server but might be something very different even for Apache version 1.3 let alone for other web-servers.


----------



## Maledictus (Dec 9, 2008)

Djn said:
			
		

> The tradeoff is that if it breaks, no one is legally responsible.



Like with most proprietary software! So not a real tradeoff here!


----------



## adamk (Dec 9, 2008)

Oko said:
			
		

> In general FreeBSD kernel is released under BSD three clause license, Xorg is released under MIT license except OpenGL which is released under some version of GPL (the difference
> between the versions are HUGE and very important).



Very minor nitpick, but the main Mesa source code is actually MIT licensed.  It was changed a while back to it could be included in Xorg.  Most of the device drivers are MIT licensed as well, I believe.  GLU is licensed under either the SGI Free B license or the GPL, depending on the version of GLU.

Adam


----------



## liamjfoy (Dec 10, 2008)

Djn said:
			
		

> Both the BSD license (that FreeBSD itself uses) and the GPL (that many programs you might install will use) allow you to use these programs for anything you want, without paying anyone.
> 
> The tradeoff is that if it breaks, no one is legally responsible.



I advise against giving legal advice  The GPL certainly does not allow me to use the code for anything I want.


----------



## liamjfoy (Dec 10, 2008)

Lobster said:
			
		

> I dont understend GNU, GPL y etc, can sambody tell what should i do (buy pay etc) to use FreeBSD at:
> 
> 1 - at home
> 2 - at web server
> 3 - at office (with Samba)



The licenses are really concerned about what you can do with the source code. If you're just a regular vanilla users of open source software the licensing issue isn't really a big deal. The licenses come into play when you start modifying source code etc.

Thats it in a basic sentense. So, you're free to use FreeBSD in all the enviroments you mentioned without worrying (and its completely free) to use. As is the support if you approach it the correct way


----------



## Brandybuck (Dec 10, 2008)

Oko said:
			
		

> That is VERY simplistic view.



It may be simplistic, but it is the reality. If you're not modifying the code, you're in the clear. If you are modifying the code, but are not distributing it, you're still in the clear. That may not be the case for all circumstances, but it is for the three that were mentioned (at home, at work, as webserver).

You do not need to pay anyone or do anything in order to deploy and use FreeBSD at home, as a webserver, or in the workplace.


----------



## adamk (Dec 10, 2008)

Brandybuck said:
			
		

> It may be simplistic, but it is the reality. If you're not modifying the code, you're in the clear. If you are modifying the code, but are not distributing it, you're still in the clear. That may not be the case for all circumstances, but it is for the three that were mentioned (at home, at work, as webserver).
> 
> You do not need to pay anyone or do anything in order to deploy and use FreeBSD at home, as a webserver, or in the workplace.



Wait, so you know what they will be doing with FreeBSD in those locations?  Or are you just assuming they aren't modifying and distributing anything?

Adam


----------



## Brandybuck (Dec 11, 2008)

adamk said:
			
		

> Wait, so you know what they will be doing with FreeBSD in those locations?  Or are you just assuming they aren't modifying and distributing anything?



If someone asks me if Brand X Bottled Water is safe for use in the home, I'm going to answer "yes" WITHOUT worrying about whether he means to use it to store a chunk of a chunk of pure potassium in it.


----------



## rhyous (Apr 2, 2010)

I had a post on this subject that I was trying to finish, so I took some time to finish it for you.
http://rhyous.com/2010/04/02/differ...opyrights-and-the-the-gnu-public-license-gpl/

Hope it helps.

If anyone sees any mistakes in the post, or something that I just must add, please let me know.


----------



## phoenix (Apr 3, 2010)

liamjfoy said:
			
		

> I advise against giving legal advice  The GPL certainly does not allow me to use the code for anything I want.



Technically, you *can* do anything you want with GPL'd source code ... so long as you don't distribute it (or the resulting binaries).  If you keep the changed sources/binaries to yourself, you can do anything and everything.


----------

