The methodology behind this graph is really rudimentary, as the original author admits[1], and I wish people would stop quoting it without big health warnings.

The methodology behind this graph is really rudimentary, as the original author admits[1], and I wish people would stop quoting it without big health warnings. "To detect what license, if any, a project is licensed under, we used an open source Ruby gem called Licensee to compare the repository's LICENSE file to a short list of known licenses. However, it's important to note that this approach doesn't count a project as licensed if the README indicates a specific license or if individual project files contain a named license in the code comments." Of my 13 (original, non-forked) projects on github, 11 state a licence; each one would be immediately found by a human looking at the project; not a single one would be found by the above method. [1] https://github.com/blog/1964-open-source-license-usage-on-github-com https://github.com/blog/1964-open-source-license-usage-on-gi...