On 27 Sep 2018, at 3:48, Anthony Carrico wrote:
On 09/26/2018 05:32 PM, Deren Dohoda wrote:
I put a package up but it has no license info in the code. I would
one which is the most permissive possible that wouldn't cause
I guess this is BSD? MIT?
In this case, don't license your code, declare it to be in the public
That doesn't necessarily solve the problem, or at least not
In UK law, for example, 'public domain' means simply 'known to the
public', and doesn't have a link to licence information. Also, it seems
that there isn't the notion of 'unowned (intellectual) property', so
that 'I place this in the public domain' could at most be interpreted as
a vague disavowal of interests. That is, it would be an absence of a
statement of a licence, rather than a statement of an absence of a
Thus the BSD licence is probably the most permissive thing that's still
unequivocally recognisable as a licence.
Norman Gray : https://nxg.me.uk
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.