"BLS" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]... > On 12/12/2009 18:44, dsimcha wrote: >> Because the Boost license doesn't require attribution for works only >> distributed >> in binary form. > > All these kitchen sink license issues are monkey buisiness. > If you don't care : make it public domain.
I'm really tired of public domain constantly being tossed around as if it were actually a reasonable option: 1. If you put someting in PD, you're no longer legally allowed to claim that you actually wrote it (leave it to a government to try to redefine reality like that...). In other words, you're not allowed to state an actual fact about it. 2. Different countries define public domain differently, some countries don't define it, and others don't even have a concept of public domain at all. Adam also said there's a liability issue, but (IANAL) that would surprise me because AIUI, public domain is all about severing *all* ties between an author and their work. But then again, that's probably just one of those things that differs by country. The thing about zlib (or something like beerware) is that it's basically a version of public domain that *isn't* total crap. > if you want to share : make it GPL 3 That's just BS. It's more like this: If you want to share *only* with people who, #1 also want to share everything they do with it, *and* #2 don't mind dealing with a fifty-foot wall of legalese gibberish that's completely impenetrable without shelling out bucks for a lawyer that'll probably cost them more than if you had just charged a basic fee in the first place: Make it GPL. If you *just simply want to share*: Make it zlib, or maybe beerware or something like that. > if you want to make money : make it close source. > period. >
