4 ms·
It is an interesting project and likely useful. At the same time, I wonder how clear the descriptions are, particularly of the permissive licenses (this is a c
by einhverfr 13y ago
It is an interesting project and likely useful.
At the same time, I wonder how clear the descriptions are, particularly of the permissive licenses (this is a critique, not a teardown). I looked at the FreeBSD and MIT licenses because of the fact that there is a subtle difference in the licenses which can cause some confusion: the MIT license explicitly allows sublicensing while the BSD licenses do not.
The descriptions were good. The MIT description was exactly the way I read the license text. The 2-clause BSD/FreeBSD license said "you can do almost anything" which immediately raises the question of "what can't you do?" My reading of the license is that the answer is "sublicense" (i.e. you can include the work in product of a different license, but you cannot change the license on the BSD code in the process of transmitting it, and that this limitation does not exist in the MIT license, were you can not only change the license but likely assert status as licensor when you do so). IANAL, but this is the sense I get from Larry Rosen's book ont he subject.
Again, I don't know that licenses can be perfectly explained in plain English, so this is a fairly minor concern if the site exists primarily as a conversation starter rather than something that people want to use as some sort of authoritative reference.