This might be relevant too: http://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/272956/a-new-code-license-the-mit-this-time-with-attribution-required
Somewhere in the text they say: << You are also welcome to use the MIT License as it is traditionally interpreted: by preserving the full license with relevant fields (copyright year and copyright holder) completed. >> Literally this would not be very practical, but somehow preserving names should be doable. > On 08 Jan 2016, at 19:55, monty <[email protected]> wrote: > > This line form the text of the license suggests we should really be bundling > the full license text with our code, not just stating "this code is MIT" on > the STH project page: > > "The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in > all copies or substantial portions of the Software." > > Because of this, I've started adding #catalogLicense methods to STH Configs I > manage that return the entire MIT license text with a copyright statement. I > think everyone should do the same. > >> Sent: Friday, January 08, 2016 at 11:08 AM >> From: "Sven Van Caekenberghe" <[email protected]> >> To: "Pharo Development List" <[email protected]> >> Subject: [Pharo-dev] Question about attribution under the MIT License >> >> 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. >> >> 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 ? >> >> Sven >> >> >> >
