5 ms·
Interestingly (to me), this is Technically GPL incompatible, since it adds additional restrictions beyond what the GPL requires.
by e1ven 14y ago
Interestingly (to me), this is Technically GPL incompatible, since it adds additional restrictions beyond what the GPL requires.
- TeMPOraL 14y agoAnother reason not to use GPL - it breaks the ability to add something funny to licence.
- thristian 14y agoNot so much a fault of the GPL as a fault of copyright law - I've heard judges tend to look poorly on people who appear to be disrespecting the legal system.
- __alexs 14y agoJust dual-license the work.
- wcoenen 14y ago"Dual-license" means that the user gets to pick a license, not that the union of all license restrictions applies.
- __alexs 14y agoWell-done. What does this have to do with making a joke license for a work people might want to actually modify? Do they not get to laugh if they choose GPL over the one with the comedy in?
- wcoenen 14y ago> Do they not get to laugh if they choose GPL over the one with the comedy in? The important thing is what happens if they pick the joke license. They get to ignore the GPL entirely, which is probably not what you want if you only intended to add something funny to your work. If you just want to add funny license terms but keep the GPL terms, you have to modify the GPL license instead of having a dual license.
- J_Darnley 14y agoOn their own code, a person can add what ever extra restrictions on top of the GPL they like. You might be able to argue that it is not really the GPL afterwards. If they want to use other GPL code in it, then they have to be careful. If someone else wants to use the code in some other GPL code, then they too have to be careful.