On Sat, Jan 9, 2016 at 12:08 AM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > I have a been wondering recently about attribution under the MIT License. > > Code in Pharo and code contributed to Pharo is and should be licensed under > the MIT License. > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIT_License > > Contributors sign an extra agreement. > > http://files.pharo.org/media/PharoSoftwareDistributionAgreement.pdf > > Here, contributors give a license so Pharo can include their code. > > As I read the MIT license the original author keeps the copyright and about > the only requirement is that that copyright shall be included when the code > is used. The extra agreement does not transfer copyright. > > So, all authors should be mentioned in the general Pharo MIT license. > > The reason I was thinking about this is that many people on the list seems to > be under the impression that MIT licensed code means that you can freely copy > it, like most recently in the discussions about Dophin Smalltalk. I think > copying MIT licensed code requires proper attribution.
The MIT license allows you to sub-license, so technically I guess you could re-license it to someone (or back to yourself) with the attribution requirement removed. But that would be really be bad form. Eric Raymond says it well [1]: "the Lockean property customs of hackerdom are a means of maximizing reputation incentives; of ensuring that peer credit goes where it is due and does not go where it is not due. ... Surreptitiously filing someone's name off a project is, in cultural context, one of the ultimate crimes. Doing this steals the victim's gift to be presented as the thief's own. [1] http://catb.org/~esr/writings/homesteading/homesteading/ar01s09.html > If people copy (my, someone else's) code from Pharo to somewhere else, I want > them to at least acknowledge that fact, preferably include a general Pharo > (contributors) copyright, but ideally (my, their) copyright. > > But that would also mean that Pharo has to do the same. I think we should > list and update the official contributor list, including the historical list > of original authors going back. > > Am I right or wrong ? > > How do other people feel about this ? I agree with you. Paying attention to this sort of thing builds community trust and involvement. cheers -ben
