Re: bsd license question

[Steve Shockley <steve_(_dot_)_shockley_(_at_)_shockley_(_dot_)_net>]

Ben Goren wrote:
> Notice I said, ``theoretically''? With all that extra verbiage in the 
> GPL, a decent lawyer should be able to twist things mightily.

Why go through all that trouble?  The GPL suggests using the wording:

---
This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it 
under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the 
Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or (at your 
option) any later version.
code to the FSF.  So, if the current leadership of the FSF is ever 
replaced with corporate-friendly members, in theory they could release a 
new license stating "All GPL code is now owned by IBM".

Of course, if they release a lawyer-friendly GPL v3, once the lawyers 
find the hole in that, most of the GPL v2 licenses will have the same hole.

(I had considered doing an April fool's "Microsoft buys FSF" press 
release at one point, but never bothered.)