4 ms·
I didn't see any mention of license back when it wasn't bought yet, what license did it used to be under before NYT?
by OrderlyTiamat 5y ago
I didn't see any mention of license back when it wasn't bought yet, what license did it used to be under before NYT?
- johannes1234321 5y agoThere is no license which allows you redistribution. Default in copyright. A license is needed tongtant you tights. (fair use etc. exists of course)
- wccrawford 5y agoIt didn't have one, which means nobody had rights except the creator.
- np_tedious 5y agoThe Javascript bundle had some kind of Microsoft license. Not sure what that meant /! ************************************** Copyright (c) Microsoft Corporation. Permission to use, copy, modify, and/or distribute this software for any purpose with or without fee is hereby granted. THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE AUTHOR DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES WITH REGARD TO THIS SOFTWARE INCLUDING ALL IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHOR BE LIABLE FOR ANY SPECIAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR ANY DAMAGES WHATSOEVER RESULTING FROM LOSS OF USE, DATA OR PROFITS, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, NEGLIGENCE OR OTHER TORTIOUS ACTION, ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE USE OR PERFORMANCE OF THIS SOFTWARE. ******************************************
- charcircuit 5y agoIt's not uncommon for javascript bundles to include licenses for libraries that are used.
- np_tedious 5y agoIf the bundle is minimized / obfuscated, and the license doesn't state which library or portion it applies to, then is it reasonable to say a well intentioned reader may think it applies to while thing?