[vox-tech] Is Google wrong about the license on ethereal?

[Rod Roark]

On Wednesday 25 May 2005 02:35 pm, Peter Jay Salzman wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> According to:
>
>    http://directory.fsf.org/All_Packages_in_Directory/ethereal.html
>
> ethereal is licensed under the GNU GPL.  But if you do a Google
> search on "ethereal license", Google returns:
>
>    Ethereal
>    License: Freeware
>    According to http://www.majorgeeks.com/download4449.html
>
> And in fact, the majorgeeks.com website does indeed claim that
> ethereal is "freeware."
>
> When push comes to shove, I don't really know what "freeware"
> means, but it sounds like it means "software provided without
> charge, without warrantee, and without obligations placed on the
> recipient of the software".  But this is just my guess.  If so, the
> GNU GPL is incompatible with the term "freeware" for a number of
> reasons.

According to www.ethereal.com it is GPL.

You can look up "freeware" in www.dictionary.com and
www.wikipedia.org.  It seems to just mean software that is
"without charge" and so the term is rather vague, but is
often applied to free-as-in-beer software that is not OSS.

I suspect the guys at majorgeeks.com were just too lazy to
look up the actual license.

-- Rod