[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: most liberal license

[ Please keep me on cc as I'm not subscribed ]


Thanks, for your response:

> > Is there some other "as free as public domain" license? I don't like
> > to reinvent the wheel, but I haven't found one yet.\
> I ususally recommend and use the MIT-Licence for that, it essentially 
> says the same stuff as yours, is the shortest of all on opensource.org, 
> and is well known and widely used.

Yes, I know the MIT-License and it is the option if there are any
objections against my draft.

However there are some things I dislike about the MIT-License:
* You are forced to include the original copyright notice, in
  whatever "substantial portions of the Software" are.
* Even worse, you are required to include the permission notice, thus
  it is half way towards copyleft. (I.e. it doesn't affect other
  software, but still you can't sell it in a proprietary way.)
* It is an enumerate style license, which means that 
  - you might forget something
  - it is water on the mills of those who write wired legal text saying
    you might do everything, but afterwards try to define what everything is.
  - it is based upon US copyright law and the rights enumerated therein,
    but there might exist other juristdictions with additional/other rights.

Ideally I would put my software in the public domain, but I've been told,
that this isn't possible in all jurisdictions (I don't even know about
my own), so I thought to circumwent this by licensing it to give the
same rights *as* public domain.


Reply to: