Well, maybe maybe not -- irrelevant, though. I was not advocating its use, just relating something. As I said, this is a legal question. I am going to ask an intellectual property lawyer.
On Sunday, February 7, 2016 at 7:04:06 PM UTC-5, Steven G. Johnson wrote: > > > > On Sunday, February 7, 2016 at 6:17:14 PM UTC-5, Jeffrey Sarnoff wrote: >> >> The question is a legal question. This is* not* legal advice. >> >> I have not done this with any Julia code. I did do something similar >> some years ago with other source code. >> Understanding that permission may be contingent on an agreement to pay >> money, the gist of it was: >> >> LICENCE: >> For strictly non-commercial use, including education and research, the >> MIT licence applies. >> > > This is incoherent — the MIT license does not limit licensees to > non-commercial use. Effecitively, you are trying to use MIT license + an > additional restriction (or minus some permissions), but written in a very > confusing way. You are basically saying: "you can do anything with this > code [MIT license], except that you can't." > > The general advice from most sources is: don't write your own license; the > odds are high that you will mess up and say something whose effects are not > what you intend. >
