Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: License for PostgreSQL for commercial purpose

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Peter Galbavy" <peter(dot)galbavy(at)knowtion(dot)net>
Cc: "Eric Yum" <eric(dot)yum(at)ck-lifesciences(dot)com>,pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: License for PostgreSQL for commercial purpose
Date: 2004-03-28 15:36:59
Message-ID: 15793.1080488219@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-admin
"Peter Galbavy" <peter(dot)galbavy(at)knowtion(dot)net> writes:
> You should get your local legal professional to give an opinion if you
> intend to redistribute. One specific area of contention amongst "BSD
> license" people is the phrase:
> "... for any purpose, without fee, and ..."
> Some opine that this means the software in question can *only* be
> distributed without charging a fee, whilst other have claimed that this
> (should) be read as "... for any purpose, with or without fee, and ...",

Neither of those readings is correct.  The correct interpretation is
that the copyright holders (us and UCB, in the case of Postgres) aren't
charging any fee.  This does not prohibit others from charging for their
own efforts.

To read it as prohibiting fees for redistribution would mean that, for
example, no Linux distribution could include BSD-licensed software
(at least not on CD sets that they charge money for).  I don't know of
anyone who thinks that is appropriate or intended.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-admin by date

Next:From: Robert C Paulsen JrDate: 2004-03-29 00:25:43
Subject: md5 is invalid?
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2004-03-28 15:28:59
Subject: Re: postgresql.conf file and logging questions

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group