3 ms·
What a silly license. Why do people insist on rolling their own? It's quite amazing to me, especially when it comes to things like cryptography and legal texts.
by hnarn 7y ago
What a silly license. Why do people insist on rolling their own? It's quite amazing to me, especially when it comes to things like cryptography and legal texts. Surely any lawyer could point at these phrases and say what you're saying now -- how do you define this? Sure, you could argue that keeping it vague is a way to protect the authors, but I'd argue that a competent lawyer would write it in a less vague way, to protect the authors even more -- if it was necessary. Is it? I doubt it, considering the type of software we see under insanely brief licenses like the MIT.
- nerdponx 7y agoThe MIT license is extremely permissive. It's a stupid measuring post for comparison, because it basically doesn't say anything at all. Yes, they could have consulted with and paid a lawyer to tighten up the wording. But unless you either own a company, or intend to use this in consulting work, I don't think this license should bother you at all. The intent and general meaning are pretty clear, even if you could argue over the definition of one word or another.