3 ms·

I usually use http://unlicense.org http://unlicense.org. TBH I think if you’re giving code away and expecting people to be actually able to make use of it, it’s

I usually use http://unlicense.org http://unlicense.org. TBH I think if you’re giving code away and expecting people to be actually able to make use of it, it’s morally indefensible to be using anything other than a zero-condition giveaway license. GPL is also acceptable for stand-alone programs if you want to enforce openness, but never for libraries. As for what companies prefer, MIT, zlib, or BSD should be fine. Most companies won’t touch GPL with a ten-foot pole.

SamWhited 8y ago
As mentioned in another thread, it is my not-a-lawyer understanding that unlicense and similar aren't enforceable in many jurisdictions, so you end up having it be unlicensed and unusable in many places.
jolmg 8y ago
> GPL is also acceptable for stand-alone programs if you want to enforce openness, but never for libraries. There's the option of using LGPL for libraries. That way, users of the library aren't required to be open source, but they are required to keep modifications of the library open source if distributed.