On Saturday, April 20, 2013 11:52:29 AM UTC-4, Phil Hagelberg wrote: > > > > Anyway, everything else about the post appears solid except for one > thing. It recommends the MIT license, which has no patent protection > whatsoever; this could open you and your users up to liabilities in ways > that are impossible to predict given that the United States Patent > Office's tendency to grant patents without examining them first. So I > strongly caution against using licenses which don't include patent grant > clauses unless it's for throw-away code. While the Apache license can be > annoying in all the boilerplate it requires, at least it doesn't have > this problem. > > Glad you brought this up, Phil.
My rules of thumb are: * if you want copyleft, *and* wish to require those incorporating your code into their own program to also copyleft, use GPL, * if you want copyleft for just your own code, use LGPL, * otherwise, if you want a more permissive license, use Apache 2. I think those three choices cover the bases pretty well. ---John -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
