🌐 Website Issue | Utilize the Unlicense #957

New Issue

jonah · 2019-05-29T20:54:50Z

asddsaz commented

2019-05-29 20:54:50 +00:00

(Migrated from github.com)

Feature: Switch to the Unlicense license
More Info: https://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unlicense#License_terms
I realize, we recently switched from the WTFPL.

I wanted to recommend another license over CC0 which can be fairly long.
The unlicense license, a WTFPL equivalence non-offensive license:
If you don't know what it is, take 30 seconds to read it:

This is free and unencumbered software released into the public domain.

Anyone is free to copy, modify, publish, use, compile, sell, or
distribute this software, either in source code form or as a compiled
binary, for any purpose, commercial or non-commercial, and by any
means.

In jurisdictions that recognize copyright laws, the author or authors
of this software dedicate any and all copyright interest in the
software to the public domain. We make this dedication for the benefit
of the public at large and to the detriment of our heirs and
successors. We intend this dedication to be an overt act of
relinquishment in perpetuity of all present and future rights to this
software under copyright law.

THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND,
EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT.
IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR
OTHER LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE,
ARISING FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR
OTHER DEALINGS IN THE SOFTWARE.

For more information, please refer to http://unlicense.org/

**Feature**: Switch to the Unlicense license **More Info**: https://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unlicense#License_terms I realize, we recently switched from the WTFPL. I wanted to recommend another license over CC0 which can be fairly long. The unlicense license, a WTFPL equivalence non-offensive license: If you don't know what it is, take 30 seconds to read it: > This is free and unencumbered software released into the public domain. > > Anyone is free to copy, modify, publish, use, compile, sell, or > distribute this software, either in source code form or as a compiled > binary, for any purpose, commercial or non-commercial, and by any > means. > > In jurisdictions that recognize copyright laws, the author or authors > of this software dedicate any and all copyright interest in the > software to the public domain. We make this dedication for the benefit > of the public at large and to the detriment of our heirs and > successors. We intend this dedication to be an overt act of > relinquishment in perpetuity of all present and future rights to this > software under copyright law. > > THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, > EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF > MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT. > IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR > OTHER LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, > ARISING FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR > OTHER DEALINGS IN THE SOFTWARE. > > For more information, please refer to <http://unlicense.org/> >

asddsaz commented

2019-05-29 20:58:25 +00:00

(Migrated from github.com)

As I understand it, WTFPL has no restrictions. Therefore, you can easily change the license.

Mikaela commented

2019-05-30 16:55:04 +00:00

(Migrated from github.com)

I am going to treat this as a duplicate of #955 as my response https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/issues/955#issuecomment-497401537 applies here too.

asddsaz commented

2019-05-31 02:19:00 +00:00

(Migrated from github.com)

@Mikaela You are just quoting others responses.

But, anyway here is my response:

WTFPL is a shitty license. We should use an actual license like MIT or preferably CC0.

Shitty or just offensive because it says f*ck?

Releasing our work into the public domain seems like the correct path. WTFPL currently grants users an unlimited license to use our work, which is maybe fine, but CC0 actually revokes all copyright
wherever possible, and falls back to an unlimited license where that's legally not a possibility. CC0 also includes a warranty disclaimer

Not really a reason to deny the Unlicense just recommends CC0.
My issue is for trying to start a discussion about Unlicense. This just talks about CC0.
:)

@Mikaela You are just quoting others responses. But, anyway here is my response: > WTFPL is a shitty license. We should use an actual license like MIT or preferably CC0. Shitty or just offensive because it says f*ck? > Releasing our work into the public domain seems like the correct path. WTFPL currently grants users an unlimited license to use our work, which is maybe fine, but CC0 actually revokes all copyright > wherever possible, and falls back to an unlimited license where that's legally not a possibility. CC0 also includes a warranty disclaimer Not really a reason to deny the Unlicense just recommends CC0. My issue is for trying to start a discussion about Unlicense. This just talks about CC0. :)

asddsaz commented

2019-05-31 02:20:24 +00:00

(Migrated from github.com)

@Mikaela That issue is about WTFPL not Unlicense.

Is it possible for this issue to be reopened?

@Mikaela That issue is about WTFPL not Unlicense. Is it possible for this issue to be reopened?

jonah commented

2019-06-01 17:25:27 +00:00

WTFPL is a shitty license. We should use an actual license like MIT or preferably CC0.

Shitty or just offensive because it says f*ck?

https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/issues/955#issuecomment-497873261

@Mikaela also addressed the issues with the Unlicense in the comment she linked as well.

The Free Software Foundation states that "Both public domain works and the lax license provided by the Unlicense are compatible with the GNU GPL." However, for dedicating software to the public domain it recommends CC0 over the Unlicense, stating that CC0 "is more thorough and mature than the Unlicense".[1]

The Fedora Project recommends CC0 over the Unlicense because the former is "a more comprehensive legal text".[10]

The Unlicense has been criticized, for instance by the OSI, for being possibly inconsistent and non-standard, and for making it difficult for some projects to accept Unlicensed code as third-party contributions; leaving too much room for interpretation; and possibly being incoherent in some legal systems.[13][14][15]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unlicense#Reception [emphasis mine]

>> WTFPL is a shitty license. We should use an actual license like MIT or preferably CC0. > > Shitty or just offensive because it says f*ck? https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/issues/955#issuecomment-497873261 @Mikaela also addressed the issues with the Unlicense in the comment she linked as well. > The Free Software Foundation states that "Both public domain works and the lax license provided by the Unlicense are compatible with the GNU GPL." However, for dedicating software to the public domain it recommends CC0 over the Unlicense, stating that **CC0 "is more thorough and mature than the Unlicense"**.[1] > > The Fedora Project **recommends CC0 over the Unlicense** because the former is "a more comprehensive legal text".[10] > > **The Unlicense has been criticized**, for instance by the OSI, **for being possibly inconsistent and non-standard**, and for making it difficult for some projects to accept Unlicensed code as third-party contributions; leaving too much room for interpretation; and **possibly being incoherent in some legal systems**.[13][14][15] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unlicense#Reception [emphasis mine]

👍 1

jonah commented

2019-06-01 17:29:43 +00:00

In any case, the CC0 is not very long (IMO), is very thorough, and is virtually universally understood within the community. You don't need to be intimately familiar with the license text to understand that work licensed under the CC0 license is in the public domain for all intents and purposes.

👍 1

This repo is archived. You cannot comment on issues.