Please understand my priorities: * Dealing with the aforementioned threat of "even more restrictive than copyleft" licenses is the most pressing concern, and it's an issue that I hope most people can agree on. Nim module licenses are not the place to punish people you don't like. * The copyLEFT vs copyFREE debate is second. * The "not copyleft but [not quite copyfree](http://copyfree.org/standard/rejected)" licenses like Apache, PyPL, Zlib, and Vim is the lowest priority.
> why pick MIT over Apache 2? MIT doesn't have patent protection and patent > trolls are a real-world problem. Apache also has additional restrictions, which is why it's [rejected by the Copyfree Initiative](http://copyfree.org/standard/rejected) and [OpenBSD](https://www.openbsd.org/policy.html). There are other ways to grant patent protection: like [Golang's patent grant](https://golang.org/PATENTS), [Rust giving you the choice of (MIT || Apache)](https://rust-lang-nursery.github.io/api-guidelines/necessities.html#crate-and-its-dependencies-have-a-permissive-license-c-permissive), or [COIL](http://coil.apotheon.org/). (Although there's confusion in Rustland with some crates being "Apache && MIT", and instead of or, which is bad.)
