3 ms·

MIT is one of the least restrictive licenses. If you think otherwise, I suggest checking if there's any aluminium foil on your head.

Nab443 1y ago
As a end user, I find it quite restrictive. There might be some software I won't be able to fork/modify because they were MIT. I'm not the owner of the software anymore.
- neonsunset 1y ago
  "The MIT License (MIT) Copyright © 2025 <copyright holders> Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy of this software and associated documentation files (the “Software”), to deal in the Software without restriction, including without limitation the rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell copies of the Software, and to permit persons..." https://mit-license.org https://mit-license.org
- pabs3 1y ago
  The MIT license always allows you to fork/modify the project. You wouldn't be the copyright owner of the existing code in your fork, but you could be the owner of the project, and the copyright owner of any new code you add.
cess11 1y ago
Free software is licensed in a way that protects your freedom. MIT license does not. Are you actually unaware of this? If so, why? Is it age or have you been sheltered somehow?
- throwaway66112 1y ago
  Free software is software that you are free to use or modify however you want.
  - cess11 1y ago
    That's too vague. Free software is software you can't take and then modify and keep your modifications hidden or proprietary, thus depriving your users and the community of access to these changes. MIT license allows this, hence it's not a free software license. Because very large corporations don't like freedom they've poisoned the discourse around software freedom and launched PR campaigns trying to substitute talk about freedom with talk about openness or open source. To some extent they've succeeded, as evidenced by the chatter about it in this thread.

Nab443 1y ago

As a end user, I find it quite restrictive. There might be some software I won't be able to fork/modify because they were MIT. I'm not the owner of the software anymore.

neonsunset 1y ago
"The MIT License (MIT) Copyright © 2025 <copyright holders> Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy of this software and associated documentation files (the “Software”), to deal in the Software without restriction, including without limitation the rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell copies of the Software, and to permit persons..." https://mit-license.org https://mit-license.org
pabs3 1y ago
The MIT license always allows you to fork/modify the project. You wouldn't be the copyright owner of the existing code in your fork, but you could be the owner of the project, and the copyright owner of any new code you add.

cess11 1y ago

Free software is licensed in a way that protects your freedom. MIT license does not. Are you actually unaware of this? If so, why? Is it age or have you been sheltered somehow?

throwaway66112 1y ago
Free software is software that you are free to use or modify however you want.
- cess11 1y ago
  That's too vague. Free software is software you can't take and then modify and keep your modifications hidden or proprietary, thus depriving your users and the community of access to these changes. MIT license allows this, hence it's not a free software license. Because very large corporations don't like freedom they've poisoned the discourse around software freedom and launched PR campaigns trying to substitute talk about freedom with talk about openness or open source. To some extent they've succeeded, as evidenced by the chatter about it in this thread.