Christopher Wright wrote:
Don wrote:
Clay Smith wrote:
Don wrote:
BCS wrote:
Hello ponce,

Source code will be released soon under the WTFPL

LOL, now /that's/ a license I can work with!

Why isn't there a version of that with non-offensive wording????
There's a hundred nearly-identical software licenses out there, but that's the only one I've seen that actually tries to be public domain.

You can relicense it however you want to.
Yes, but that involves creating a new license. Which is the worst possible choice.

No, you can take a WTFPL work and include it in a GPL'd work without changing the license.

You can't, however, sue someone for violating the GPL if they use only the WTFPL portions of the GPL'd work, because you don't own the copyright, and therefore you lack both standing in the court and the ability to restrict others' usage of the work.

No, I mean I want to release code under the same conditions as the WTFPL license, but with less offensive wording. I can't do this without creating a new license. Every other license seems to have a silly "this notice may not be removed" clause. I'm only including a license for the benefit of the users, not for myself. With all the stuff people say about how there are legal ambiguities with public domain, I just find it unbelievable that there's no "formalized public domain" license.

Reply via email to