Re: [License-discuss] MIT-Clone: Copyright notice

Quoting Jasper Horn (jasperh...@gmail.com): > What do you people think about this? Since you ask: IMO, the optimal solution to your problem is to cease obsessing over MIT License copyright notices -- which are in the short term doing no harm and over the long term will tend to do positive good

Re: [License-discuss] MIT-Clone: Copyright notice

I bet when copyright was first created, the working assumption is that a work is a relatively static thing. Software is not. And this brings up the Ship of Theseus problem (Take a ship, replace all the boards. at what point is it no longer the same

Re: [License-discuss] MIT-Clone: Copyright notice

> > Yet, this cannot be fixed because the license prohibits it. > While the MIT license stipulates that “the above copyright notice” shall be included, I see nothing that prevents the copyright notice from being amended to list additional copyright holders. It seems to be common practice to add