On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 05:53:30PM +0100, Anselm R Garbe wrote:
On 21 June 2010 17:27, Uriel <ur...@berlinblue.org> wrote:
On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 12:56 PM, anonymous <ake7z...@lavabit.com> wrote:
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 09:46:12PM +0200, ⚖ Alexander "Surma" Surma wrote:
I was just about to ask, Creatives Common BY-SA?
Already discussed on this list, but for software instead of art.
Unlicense[1] for software,
While in principle I like the idea of the 'unlicense', its legal value
is very questionable. For software and code sticking with the classic
BSD/MIT/ISC licenses is a much better idea.
I personally 'dual-license' my code as ISC and then release it to the
public domain.
I kind of liked the license 20h was using in the past:
"Copy me if you can"
I liked that one two. But it was tongue-in-cheek rather than
practical. It means nothing legally. I tend to stick to
BEER-WARE where possible.
--
Kris Maglione
If the lessons of history teach us anything it is that nobody learns
the lessons that history teaches us.
