@haui see, #PHP's license is #permissive BSD-like, and how it nicely got adopted.
It didn't need #copyleft licensing, and there were and still are tons of webhosting providers.
#permissive
#PSA:
Both #Linux the various #BSD projects are awesome #FOSS endeavors that deserve respect and curious investigation.
Both #CopyLeft and #Permissive licenses like the BSD/MIT/ISC have valid use cases.
Let's back away from the meme polemics and learn to respect everyone working towards freedom.
As you were.
@gondolyr personally, I also loke #permissive licenses like #0BSD.
What's better?
#permissive
#copyleft
Open for business: #Chinese firms are #Singapore-bound
"We shld also not allow the world to think tt an easy #business environment also means a #permissive one. Some hv even suggested tt #Singaporewashing – the process where foreign actors take advantage of our simple registration processes & global reputation for incorruptibility to incorp fronts for #dubiousbusiness activities – is some form of quid pro quo for investing in 🇸🇬 .. Such a mindset will come back to bite us"
https://www.scmp.com/week-asia/economics/article/3271163/open-business-chinese-firms-are-singapore-bound-will-they-stay
in either case, previous versions remain available.
Correct. Even if the controller of the public #git repo takes it down without warning, the community can still fork the project based on the local copies of the repo that various people have lying around.
It seems to me like the core problem is not about using a copyleft licence or not, but about assigning ownership.
It's both. If you have #permissive licensing or copyright assignment (or similar), then one entity can take their ball and go home, closing all future versions that they make. If you have #CopyLeft and you don't have copyright assignment, then they can't.
With all this #Redis fallout, it is really bothersome to see how a lot of people that are vocal about #foss values keep confusing the licensing topic with the copyright one. No #copyleft source license would be an automatic salvation in such a case to begin with - because ANY license can be changed by the copyright holder. Go ahead and hate/blame Redis Ltd. to your heart‘s content for what they did, but please, stop spreading #fud about #permissive #licensing in general.
TIL: "There are two kinds of free: free as in free puppies, and free as in free beer." - What’s a #Permissive #License – and Why Should I Care?
https://freebsdfoundation.org/blog/whats-a-permissive-license-and-why-should-i-care/
And yes, after considering the mountain of evidence I decided to choose a #permissive instead of #copyleft license.
In fact, I did choose the same license that @landley chose for #toybox: #0BSD.
https://github.com/OS-1337/OS1337/blob/main/LICENSE.md
Since #copyleft would not guarantee improvements as can be seen not only from #BusyBox but also @grsecurity and #Viprinet #VPN - #Routers.
["#Viprinux" is a botched and horribly outdated #OpenADK mess based off what they released on their website]...
https://web.archive.org/web/20230331121150/https://www.viprinet.com/en/support/downloads
The Blue Oak Model License is the one that fits all my requirements perfectly, namely:
- it is permissive
- has patent and contribution coverage
- clear text, no legalese
- simple and modern template
- maintenance-friendly, with no personalized copyright header in the template itself
- no dreaded ALL-CAPS
Going to use it for all my projects and highly recommended to everyone else out there! 👍
Being rather picky about and unsatisfied with most #permissive #licenses, I am kinda on the verge of writing my own one... license proliferation be damned.
#floss #opensource
The so called "strong" #copyleft philosophy is deeply unethical and has nothing to do with protecting freedom. You can twist the definition to suit your political agenda, like some do, but ultimately - your ideology is hypocritical.
If you care about the freedom and making the society better - go with #permissive licensing for your next #floss project.
If you insist on reciprocity (non-viral) for your code, at least go with #MPL - the most sane of share-alike licenses. Don't go #GPL, pls.
#Permissive #licenses allow proprietary forks, meaning the original project may be embraced, extended, and extinguished without the creator ever gaining a penny for their work. #GPL and other #copyleft licenses grant an unspoken freedom from extinguishment.
@msw @timbray @sogrady @ahl Do not forget #permissive #copyright of many #freesoftware pieces.
Finally rolled out the #November version of the #japanese #calendar, #improving it every month!
#CreativeCommons, BY-ND #license (#assets do not allow me for a more #permissive one, sorry)
Feel free to share #suggestions if you have any ^^
https://archive.org/details/calendar-horizontal-jp/calendar-2022-11-horizontal-JP.png
All open source licenses are permissive
All open source licenses are permissive. They give you permission in advance to use the software for any purpose, to improve the software any way you wish and to share the software with whoever you want. They are the opposite of proprietary licenses, which place restrictions on each of these freedoms. Any license with restrictions would not be considered OSD compliant.
All open source licenses include conditions. Some relate to attribution. Some relate to reciprocal licensing. None of them restrict how you can use, improve and share the software, although you must comply with the conditions in order to do so. Some people consider some conditions so onerous they rise to the level of restrictions, but the consensus of the community has been they are wrong.
Today’s licensing games are thus mainly about testing where the accumulated burden of conditions is effectively a restriction – “constructive restriction”. There’s certainly a line where that would become true – for example, where the conditions associated with deploying the software as a cloud service are so hard to comply with that the software is effectively unusable in that field of use.
The OSD doesn’t include much to help with this so it’s contentious every time and sometimes leads to sophistry. This is probably the area where the Open Source Initiative needs to do the most work to modernise the license approval process.
@jex @nebunez Examples:
- The (A)GPL licenses, and the Sybase Open Watcom Public License are strong copyleft licenses.
- The LGPL and the Mozilla Public License are weak copyleft licenses.
- The Apache, MIT, Revised BSD License are permissive licenses.
- The WTFPL, CC0 and Unlicense are public-domain-like-licenses.
Thanks, @conservancy I really enjoyed Miss Nicholson's talk @ #opensourcelx on the benefits of #opensource and what's the @conservancy role.
And such a good way to win the audience from the starts :D
"I was reading a little bit about Portugal and I found that you[Portuguese] are the inventor of marmalade "
also #redis #permissive #license issue.
Collaborate with everyone
"[...] so..I'm collaborating with my competitor"
Volvo and its proprietary code #emissions
Client Info
Server: https://mastodon.social
Version: 2025.07
Repository: https://github.com/cyevgeniy/lmst