5 ms·
If that's what he wanted what stopped him from adding one more paragraph to the licence saying something similar to: "The USER is required to publicly thank AU
by levosmetalo 6y ago
If that's what he wanted what stopped him from adding one more paragraph to the licence saying something similar to:
"The USER is required to publicly thank AUTHOR, and make the thanking reproducible in every copy of the derived work that uses this software."
You don't need a lawyer for that. And if someone wants to use his work without attribution, they are free to negotiate a copy with different licence terms directly with the author and provide a compensation.
- ojnabieoot 6y agoThe whole point of these highly permissive licenses is that we don't want to constrain independent hackers, or put people in a position where they are unsure if their fork might expose them to liability. It is undoubtedly discourteous of AWS to release an OSS fork as a new feature without crediting the original author. It is not the end of the world. It is not a reason to go and change your licenses to make things more difficult for the other 95% of developers. But it is a reason to say "some people at AWS are just dang ol' jerks."