4 ms·

> Everything here is provided under the MIT license. This means that you can use as you wish; you don’t have to credit me Doesn't the MIT license require that

> Everything here is provided under the MIT license. This means that you can use as you wish; you don’t have to credit me Doesn't the MIT license require that it be reproduced with all derivative works, including the copyright line (which includes the author)?

xeeeeeeeeeeenu 7y ago
Yes, it does require that, even for binaries. MIT and [23]-clause BSD are probably the most often violated FOSS licenses because most people aren't aware of that. BTW, that requirement is the reason why Boost, 1-clause BSD and 0BSD licenses are a thing.
- saagarjha 7y ago
  I wonder if this could end up taking more space than the code itself…
- legulere 7y ago
  You can also use CC0 for software to dedicate something into the public domain.
  - smartmic 7y ago
    Or use https://unlicense.org/ https://unlicense.org/
  - est31 7y ago
    In many countries, you can't release your works into the public domain. You can only license them. Thus you should generally avoid CC0.
    - zokier 7y ago
      CC0 is explicitly designed with such legal issues in mind and includes a license for legislations that do not have direct way of putting works to PD > If the waiver isn’t effective for any reason, then CC0 acts as a license from the affirmer granting the public an unconditional, irrevocable, non exclusive, royalty free license to use the work for any purpose. https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/CC0_FAQ#How_does_it_work.3F https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/CC0_FAQ#How_does_it_wo... https://creativecommons.org/share-your-work/public-domain/cc0/ https://creativecommons.org/share-your-work/public-domain/cc...
      - est31 7y ago
        Alright thanks for pointing that out, I misremembered it then.
    - vertex-four 7y ago
      The point of CC0 is that it puts things in the public domain if possible, and provides the most liberal license if not. See the "public license fallback" - https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/legalcode https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/legalcode
  - fanf2 7y ago
    CC0 has a mildly problematic patents clause, so if you want to avoid questions about that you might prefer 0BSD. There is a longer explanation on the OSI FAQ https://opensource.org/faq#cc-zero https://opensource.org/faq#cc-zero
    - legulere 7y ago
      BSD is unclear about patents. How is that better than explicitly stating that the license is just about copyright?
- justincormack 7y ago
  Yes, 0BSD is the generally recommended no obligations version https://spdx.org/licenses/0BSD.html https://spdx.org/licenses/0BSD.html

xeeeeeeeeeeenu 7y ago

Yes, it does require that, even for binaries. MIT and [23]-clause BSD are probably the most often violated FOSS licenses because most people aren't aware of that. BTW, that requirement is the reason why Boost, 1-clause BSD and 0BSD licenses are a thing.

saagarjha 7y ago
I wonder if this could end up taking more space than the code itself…
legulere 7y ago
You can also use CC0 for software to dedicate something into the public domain.
- smartmic 7y ago
  Or use https://unlicense.org/ https://unlicense.org/
- est31 7y ago
  In many countries, you can't release your works into the public domain. You can only license them. Thus you should generally avoid CC0.
  - zokier 7y ago
    CC0 is explicitly designed with such legal issues in mind and includes a license for legislations that do not have direct way of putting works to PD > If the waiver isn’t effective for any reason, then CC0 acts as a license from the affirmer granting the public an unconditional, irrevocable, non exclusive, royalty free license to use the work for any purpose. https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/CC0_FAQ#How_does_it_work.3F https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/CC0_FAQ#How_does_it_wo... https://creativecommons.org/share-your-work/public-domain/cc0/ https://creativecommons.org/share-your-work/public-domain/cc...
    - est31 7y ago
      Alright thanks for pointing that out, I misremembered it then.
  - vertex-four 7y ago
    The point of CC0 is that it puts things in the public domain if possible, and provides the most liberal license if not. See the "public license fallback" - https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/legalcode https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/legalcode
- fanf2 7y ago
  CC0 has a mildly problematic patents clause, so if you want to avoid questions about that you might prefer 0BSD. There is a longer explanation on the OSI FAQ https://opensource.org/faq#cc-zero https://opensource.org/faq#cc-zero
  - legulere 7y ago
    BSD is unclear about patents. How is that better than explicitly stating that the license is just about copyright?
justincormack 7y ago
Yes, 0BSD is the generally recommended no obligations version https://spdx.org/licenses/0BSD.html https://spdx.org/licenses/0BSD.html