nixers
A simple licensing question. - Printable Version
+- nixers (https://nixers.net)
+-- Forum: General (https://nixers.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: Psychology, Philosophy, and Licenses (https://nixers.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=28)
+--- Thread: A simple licensing question. (/showthread.php?tid=1584)
Pages: 1 2 3


A simple licensing question. - cjm - 12-11-2014

Nixers,

If you were to create a new programming project personally, what license would you choose? GPL, BSD? And why?


RE: A simple licensing question. - rwzy - 12-11-2014

Nice question goPhir.

GPL because it pisses off BSD folks?


RE: A simple licensing question. - venam - 12-11-2014

This is always a question that throttles my mind when I'm working on a project.
It mainly depends on the usage of the program and the expectations of it.

If you really, but really don't care about what happens to your software you'd better go for public domain.
Otherwise, you'll need to compare the alternatives.


RE: A simple licensing question. - xero - 12-11-2014

i <3 me some creative commons

https://creativecommons.org/choose/


RE: A simple licensing question. - kirby - 12-11-2014

BSD or better. I've had this discussion on the irc before, the GNU GPL simply isn't practical, and chances are you don't have the legal power nor the care to actually track down someone who illegally uses your code in a closed-source project, so why bother?


RE: A simple licensing question. - rwzy - 13-11-2014

The GPL is avoided by many (as in companies/corporations) because they don't want to risk it just in case. And then for those who do use it in derivatives, it becomes like a cancer, the eventual plan being it embraces, extends and extinguishes everything so that those who aim to avoid it may even one day be forced to use it, and therefore they become defeated and eliminated either way. :D

Or if you take a moral high ground like rms, the bsd is basically saying you can be naughty if you want. But the gpl says you can't be naughty, so therefore it's overall gooder, &there4; reason enough to use it. Although I agree this probably ain't practical but I guess the point is that you shouldn't nevertheless be specifically allowing everyone to be naughty if they want. And for organisations like fsf, I guess it isn't completely impractical since they have the sflc.


RE: A simple licensing question. - vypr - 26-11-2014

Licenses I use:
  • ISC
  • MIT
  • BSD



RE: A simple licensing question. - z3bra - 26-11-2014

WTFPL


RE: A simple licensing question. - pizzaroll1 - 26-11-2014

BSD. I really don't care about anything anyone does with my code unless they claim they made it. In actual fact, I wouldn't be able to stop someone from cloning a repo, compiling some packages and claiming they made them, so maybe I should just be realistic and Creative Commons Zero license everything. I'd still like to think I have some power, so I still do use BSD, regardless of whether I can actually enforce it.


RE: A simple licensing question. - xero - 28-11-2014

(26-11-2014, 02:30 PM)pizzaroll1 Wrote: BSD. I really don't care about anything anyone does with my code unless they claim they made it. In actual fact, I wouldn't be able to stop someone from cloning a repo, compiling some packages and claiming they made them, so maybe I should just be realistic and Creative Commons Zero license everything. I'd still like to think I have some power, so I still do use BSD, regardless of whether I can actually enforce it.

then go with one of the creative commons **attribution** licenses.

people can do what they want w/ it as long as they give you credit as the original author.