2 ms·

This is the part I dislike about these super permissive licenses. Attribution is required, but a couple lines in some random file do you a fat lot of good if so

This is the part I dislike about these super permissive licenses. Attribution is required, but a couple lines in some random file do you a fat lot of good if someone forks your project, rebrands, and essentially builds on top of your hard work. It's the ugly side of open source. The community runs on the assumption that we're all on the same side and we wouldn't stab each other in the back like that, but it happens, and when it does, it stings, and a couple lines in some README file don't make up for it. Is there a license that permits usage as a package, allows people to contribute, but prohibits forking? I guess, similar to what happened with ElasticSearch and others, right?

ctvo 5y ago
> Attribution is required, but a couple lines in some random file do you a fat lot of good if someone forks your project, rebrands, and essentially builds on top of your ripped off hard work. Creator of the original work understands their license, and is happy when this happens [1]. The problem is this minimal, low bar wasn't even met. It was a fork in all sense of the word with git history wiped, renamed, and attribution removed until it was brought up publicly. 1 - https://twitter.com/jorgebucaran/status/1441741173085786116 https://twitter.com/jorgebucaran/status/1441741173085786116