license suggestions?

[kosh]

Chris Watson wrote:

> 
> 
> On Sat, 7 Jul 2001, Neil Macneale wrote:
> 
>> I am wondering if there is a straight forward license which I can use for
>> python code I plan to distribute.  Is there a standard header, or
>> possibly a link that can be placed in a header which basically says that
>> people use the code at there own risk, and that they are free to change
>> it?  I ask here because I know there has been conflict between python and
>> GPL.  Is there some vanilla header that people in this group use?
> 
> This is what I use. A standard 2 clause (clause 1 and 2) FreeBSD style
> copyright but with my own clause 3 to PREVENT people from GPL'ing my code
> and thereby RESTRICTING its useage. I call it the static BSD License. Once
> it's BSDL'ed it can't be made any less free. It's the closest thing to
> public domain you can get yet still cover you A$$ from liability, and the
> like. It keeps the code BSDL'ed and prevents someone from GPL'ing it
> basically. If a company wanted to license it differently I would have ZERO
> problem letting them license it for their own needs whatever that may be.
> I just REFUSE to let the code be GPL'ed. Hence clause 3.
> 
This seems really strange to me. So you are saying you can integrate it 
into any proprietary product without problems? You can intergrate it into 
perl, python etc with their various licenses. Why do you specifically not 
want anyone to integrate it with GPL code but allow everything else?