>>19
no, it is not. http://opendevice.blogspot.com/2007/06/best-gnu-gpl-vs-bsd-comparison-ever.html Lastly, software released under the GPL is not free: if you choose to copy and paste GPL code into your own program you have to share it. This is how you pay for GPL code. http://www.matusiak.eu/numerodix/blog/index.php/2007/12/15/gpl-vs-bsd-a-matter-of-sustainability/ The BSD is no doubt a freer license, it gives you the right to decide what rights to bundle with the software. That is much closer to the absolute meaning of “freedom” than the GPL. What the GPL terms “freedom” is actually fairly subversive, because it *forces* you to do certain things. Most people who are forced to do something call that a “restriction” rather than a “freedom”. It’s true that you have certain freedoms when you get the software, but if you want to pass it on you have restrictions, so they could just as well call it the four freedoms and the four restrictions. Therefore, if we take the philosophical ideal of freedom to heart, even though both of these licenses promote free software, none of them represent freedom, and the GPL is far less free than the BSD.