4 ms·

I dont see why it needs attribution when it's MIT. Okay, you may argue its about ethics. Then why the heck do we need different types of license then? Whatever

I dont see why it needs attribution when it's MIT. Okay, you may argue its about ethics. Then why the heck do we need different types of license then? Whatever the licence people still want attribution, share in business that use their project etc etc. Lets just put on the README.md attribute me, release the source or do whatever you want, dont use my project for profits.

geofft 6y ago
> Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy of this software and associated documentation files (the "Software"), to deal in the Software without restriction, including without limitation the rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the Software is furnished to do so, subject to the following conditions: > The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software. The MIT license has just one condition, but it's there. (If you don't want it, try 0-clause BSD.) The original purpose of the MIT license was to require attribution: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=9263265 https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=926... (From other comments, it sounds like Tailwind isn't a derivative of the copyrighted work in Windi, just the idea, so the MIT license is not relevant. But if the MIT license is relevant, the one and only thing the MIT license obligates you to do is to attribute the origin of the code. Even if you incorporate it into GPL'd software, even if you incorporate it into commercial software, the MIT license and the original copyright notice must be preserved.)
- oflannabhra 6y ago
  But the code wasn’t even used, from what I can tell. No one is even making that claim. It was just an idea for a feature.

geofft 6y ago

> Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy of this software and associated documentation files (the "Software"), to deal in the Software without restriction, including without limitation the rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the Software is furnished to do so, subject to the following conditions: > The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software. The MIT license has just one condition, but it's there. (If you don't want it, try 0-clause BSD.) The original purpose of the MIT license was to require attribution: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=9263265 https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=926... (From other comments, it sounds like Tailwind isn't a derivative of the copyrighted work in Windi, just the idea, so the MIT license is not relevant. But if the MIT license is relevant, the one and only thing the MIT license obligates you to do is to attribute the origin of the code. Even if you incorporate it into GPL'd software, even if you incorporate it into commercial software, the MIT license and the original copyright notice must be preserved.)

oflannabhra 6y ago
But the code wasn’t even used, from what I can tell. No one is even making that claim. It was just an idea for a feature.