[may I humbly suggest that people should just respond to netbsd-advocacy,
 not to everyone who has ever participated in this thread? -sbs]

In message <199912081639.LAA22452@ghost.whirlpool.com>, Andrew Gillham writes:
>Are you claiming these companies are not complying?  The whole point of
>the BSD type license is to allow *exactly this* type of use.  Why is there
>suddenly a lot of discussion about TNF being "screwed" because people are
>using the software?

The same reason that RMS suddenly got really incensed that Linux systems
weren't called Lignux.

RMS doesn't want to *require* credit to be given, but he's mad if people
don't give him credit.  We don't want to *require* people to contribute back,
but some of us (admittedly, not me) get mad if they don't.

The problem is, what we really want is the "you owe me, buster" license.
Well, sometimes.

Emotionally, I'm hurt that someone might be using code I've written without
giving me proper credit, or sharing the results, or *something.
Intellectually, though, I've decided that I'd rather my code be used as much
as possible, and if some people won't give me credit, well, they're jerks...
but I *still* think my code is more useful if they can use it.

>Let's see some of these "publicity" proponents to put up a webpage 
>listing all of the uses of NetBSD they have at work, or home, or anywhere
>they can legally reference.

Huh.  I'll have to gripe at my webmaster; it *used* to be the case that
our page had links to that.  Actually, come to think of it, we still have
this:

>Internet Connectivity
>
>We offer a flexible pricing structure for Internet accounts and web site
>hosting on our fast and reliable BSD/OS and NetBSD Unix servers.

And sure enough, NetBSD is a link to www.netbsd.org.  ;-)

>Please, let's go back to figuring out how to spinup those second CPUs
>on many of our Intel based motherboards.. :-)

That would certainly be a happy-making thing.

-s