3 ms·

I don't read anything suggesting that in the MIT licence. I don't see why they couldn't say "the fork came with its own LICENSE file, which we moved in this sub

by palata 2y ago

I don't read anything suggesting that in the MIT licence. I don't see why they couldn't say "the fork came with its own LICENSE file, which we moved in this subfolder, and now the root LICENSE file is the one of our new project".

Kubuxu 2y ago
The question is, "If I look at this repo, who owns the copyright?" Sure, you could move the original LICENSE into a directory. Still, if the files are intermingled, you should have a prominent notice that says, " Hey, these files have mixed copyright ownership."
- palata 2y ago
  > Still, if the files are intermingled, you should have a prominent notice that says, " Hey, these files have mixed copyright ownership." I don't think that the licence asks to do anything like that. Where in the MIT licence do you see that?