[PD] Why is PD not in GPL ?

Marc Lavallée marc at hacklava.net
Mon Dec 13 01:14:02 CET 2004

Tim Blechmann a écrit :
>>PD have a license (a "Standard Improved BSD License"), but GPL is more
>>secure, not ?
>>What are the reasons for that?
> possibly because miller allows to use pd's source code in commercial,
> closed-source applications (e.g. max/msp)

Very probably.

 From "http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html" :
Modified BSD license
     This is the original BSD license, modified by removal of the 
advertising clause. It is a simple, permissive non-copyleft free 
software license, compatible with the GNU GPL.

     If you want a simple, permissive non-copyleft free software 
license, the modified BSD license is a reasonable choice. However, it is 
risky to recommend use of ``the BSD license'', because confusion could 
easily occur and lead to use of the flawed original BSD license. To 
avoid this risk, you can suggest the X11 license instead. The X11 
license and the revised BSD license are more or less equivalent.

So, appart from the possible confusion between the old and new BSD 
licence, BSD is good choice.


More information about the Pd-list mailing list