3 ms·
As one of the original authors of the Unlicense, always nice to see yet more people opt out of the copyright racket. The growing visibility of unlicensing is a
by arto 15y ago
As one of the original authors of the Unlicense, always nice to see yet more people opt out of the copyright racket.
The growing visibility of unlicensing is a good thing what with the copyright industry increasingly running amok. Sometimes things have to get worse before they can get better.
The project list at http://unlicense.org/ http://unlicense.org/ could probably use an update sometime soon. Link suggestions are welcome via the mailing list as usual.
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- bhickey 15y agoThere's currently a lively debate on License-review about OSI certification of CC0. Contention is largely focused on these patent issues. I dig the public domain, but until the courts, legislature, and/or international treaty say otherwise I think these dedications are hazardous to those downstream. Edit: In reply to (and without attribution) the following deleted message: I believe there was commentary relating to unlicense's approach on the OSI's license-discuss list in December. In particular, one legal expert pointed out that you can't open by dedicating your work to the public domain (the 1st line) and then proceed to issue a license for use. The CC0 license was held up for an example of how to do a dedication plus fall-back as crafted by someone who has a background in law... but this license explicitly reserves patent rights and is therefore a poor substitute software license (IMHO, IANAL). I'd love to see these "public domain statements" also start to include a patent abandonment and/or promise not to patent clause if the full intent is to be completely free.