[License-discuss] Shortest copyleft licence
I posted this question to the contact form at opensource.org, which sent me an automated response suggesting (among other things) posting the question to this list, which I thought was a good idea. I like copyleft licences preventing derivative works from being re-monopolized, but every copyleft licence I've seen is quite long. Is there a really short copyleft licence, comparable in length to, say, the ISC licence? It may be hard to write a copyleft licence quite that short, but I'm sure someone can do better than what I've seen so far. What's the shortest copyleft licence people on this list know of? It doesn't have to be specifically a software licence; it could be one designed for free cultural works in general. I think the shortest copyleft licence I've seen so far (judging it against the others by glancing at the text in a browser) is the Open Publication Licence [1], which a more careful (automated) word-count measures at nearly 800 words. [1] http://opencontent.org/openpub/ Tim ___ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@opensource.org http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
Re: [License-discuss] Shortest copyleft licence
Maxthon Chan scripsit: Is it favorable to add a copy left clause into 2BSDL to make it copyleft? You must provide the source code, in its human-preferred format, with this work or any derivatives of this work you created when redistributing. That's pretty much what the Sleepycat license does. Here's a very lightly edited version of its additional clause: Redistributions in any form must be accompanied by information on how to obtain complete source code for the licensed software and any accompanying software that uses the licensed software. The source code must either be included in the distribution or be available for no more than the cost of distribution plus a nominal fee, and must be freely redistributable under reasonable conditions. For an executable file, complete source code means the source code for all modules it contains. It does not include source code for modules or files that typically accompany the major components of the operating system on which the executable file runs. The restrictions pretty much match those of the GPL2. The Sleepycat license itself is redundant and non-templatized, so it can't be reused directly. If someone felt like proposing something like 2-clause BSD + the above, I for one would welcome it. Unlike the GPL, this does not create a new and distinct software commons. -- John Cowan http://www.ccil.org/~cowanco...@ccil.org Police in many lands are now complaining that local arrestees are insisting on having their Miranda rights read to them, just like perps in American TV cop shows. When it's explained to them that they are in a different country, where those rights do not exist, they become outraged. --Neal Stephenson ___ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@opensource.org http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
Re: [License-discuss] Shortest copyleft licence
On 2015-03-30 at 20:40:56, Tim Makarios wrote: What's the shortest copyleft licence people on this list know of? You may want to look at copyleft-next since it is an effort to create an effective but short copyleft license: https://gitorious.org/copyleft-next The latest release (0.3.0) is 1500 words long. Francois -- http://fmarier.org/ ___ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@opensource.org http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
Re: [License-discuss] Shortest copyleft licence
Is it favorable to add a copy left clause into 2BSDL to make it copyleft? You must provide the source code, in its human-preferred format, with this work or any derivatives of this work you created when redistributing. Sent from my iPad On Mar 30, 2015, at 18:22, Francois Marier franc...@fmarier.org wrote: On 2015-03-30 at 20:40:56, Tim Makarios wrote: What's the shortest copyleft licence people on this list know of? You may want to look at copyleft-next since it is an effort to create an effective but short copyleft license: https://gitorious.org/copyleft-next The latest release (0.3.0) is 1500 words long. Francois -- http://fmarier.org/ ___ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@opensource.org http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss ___ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@opensource.org http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
Re: [License-discuss] Shortest copyleft licence
Then I would like to propose this Copyleft-modified 2BSDL (or its 3BSDL-based cousin) but how? I would prefer writing the additional clause in the same fashion of the original clauses though. Sent from my iPhone On Mar 30, 2015, at 22:24, co...@ccil.org wrote: Maxthon Chan scripsit: Is it favorable to add a copy left clause into 2BSDL to make it copyleft? You must provide the source code, in its human-preferred format, with this work or any derivatives of this work you created when redistributing. That's pretty much what the Sleepycat license does. Here's a very lightly edited version of its additional clause: Redistributions in any form must be accompanied by information on how to obtain complete source code for the licensed software and any accompanying software that uses the licensed software. The source code must either be included in the distribution or be available for no more than the cost of distribution plus a nominal fee, and must be freely redistributable under reasonable conditions. For an executable file, complete source code means the source code for all modules it contains. It does not include source code for modules or files that typically accompany the major components of the operating system on which the executable file runs. The restrictions pretty much match those of the GPL2. The Sleepycat license itself is redundant and non-templatized, so it can't be reused directly. If someone felt like proposing something like 2-clause BSD + the above, I for one would welcome it. Unlike the GPL, this does not create a new and distinct software commons. -- John Cowan http://www.ccil.org/~cowanco...@ccil.org Police in many lands are now complaining that local arrestees are insisting on having their Miranda rights read to them, just like perps in American TV cop shows. When it's explained to them that they are in a different country, where those rights do not exist, they become outraged. --Neal Stephenson ___ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@opensource.org http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss ___ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@opensource.org http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
Re: [License-discuss] Shortest copyleft licence
On 30/03/15 07:40, Tim Makarios wrote Publication Licence [1], which a more careful (automated) word-count measures at nearly 800 words. Isn't the DWTFYL license shorter? (I can't override the NSFW search on my browser, to find a copy of that license.) jonathon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@opensource.org http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
Re: [License-discuss] Shortest copyleft licence
The wtfpl both isn't copyleft, nor is it a valid copyright license for software. On Mar 30, 2015 4:23 PM, jonathon jonathon.bl...@gmail.com wrote: On 30/03/15 07:40, Tim Makarios wrote Publication Licence [1], which a more careful (automated) word-count measures at nearly 800 words. Isn't the DWTFYL license shorter? (I can't override the NSFW search on my browser, to find a copy of that license.) jonathon ___ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@opensource.org http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss ___ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@opensource.org http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
Re: [License-discuss] Shortest copyleft licence
What does copyleft mean? The purpose of a copyleft provision in my mind is to make it so that changes get contributed back. While it is clear that the Sleepycat license attempts to do so, it does not stop source being available for a nominal fee under an additional copyright license chosen by the contributor. If that license happens to be the GPL, well OK. But Sleepycat can't use that code without changing their license. If that license happens to be something preventing further modification and redistribution, then you've lost the whole point of copyleft. Nailing down copyleft and making it actually work is surprisingly tricky. That is one reason why careful copyleft licenses are so verbose. On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 7:24 AM, co...@ccil.org wrote: Maxthon Chan scripsit: Is it favorable to add a copy left clause into 2BSDL to make it copyleft? You must provide the source code, in its human-preferred format, with this work or any derivatives of this work you created when redistributing. That's pretty much what the Sleepycat license does. Here's a very lightly edited version of its additional clause: Redistributions in any form must be accompanied by information on how to obtain complete source code for the licensed software and any accompanying software that uses the licensed software. The source code must either be included in the distribution or be available for no more than the cost of distribution plus a nominal fee, and must be freely redistributable under reasonable conditions. For an executable file, complete source code means the source code for all modules it contains. It does not include source code for modules or files that typically accompany the major components of the operating system on which the executable file runs. The restrictions pretty much match those of the GPL2. The Sleepycat license itself is redundant and non-templatized, so it can't be reused directly. If someone felt like proposing something like 2-clause BSD + the above, I for one would welcome it. Unlike the GPL, this does not create a new and distinct software commons. -- John Cowan http://www.ccil.org/~cowanco...@ccil.org Police in many lands are now complaining that local arrestees are insisting on having their Miranda rights read to them, just like perps in American TV cop shows. When it's explained to them that they are in a different country, where those rights do not exist, they become outraged. --Neal Stephenson ___ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@opensource.org http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss ___ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@opensource.org http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
Re: [License-discuss] Shortest copyleft licence
Quoting jonathon (jonathon.bl...@gmail.com): On 30/03/15 07:40, Tim Makarios wrote Publication Licence [1], which a more careful (automated) word-count measures at nearly 800 words. Isn't the DWTFYL license shorter? (I can't override the NSFW search on my browser, to find a copy of that license.) WTFPL v. 2 (latest) is so badly written it grants rights only to the _licence_ itself, and not to any ostensibly covered work. (Read it.) Noting that it leaves warranty liability intact (probably accidentally) seems beside the point, in comparison. It's an object lesson in why coders should not attempt to draft what are often on this mailing list termed 'crayon licences'. A broader point: The quest for the shortest possible licence (of whatever category) strikes me as solving the wrong problem. If your problem is that you're dealing with people having difficulty contending with the reality of a worldwide copyright regime and trying to wish it out of their lives, maybe overcoming that lack of reality orientation ought to be your task. (My opinion, yours for a small fee and waiver of reverse-engineering rights.) -- Cheers, I know you believe you understood what you think I said, Rick Moenbut I'm not sure you realize that what you heard is not r...@linuxmafia.com what I meant. -- S.I. Hayakawa McQ! (4x80) ___ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@opensource.org http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
