No right to relicense this project
https://github.com/chardet/chardet/issues/327
#HackerNews #NoRightToRelicense #ProjectIssues #OpenSourceLicensing #GitHubDiscussion #Chardet
No right to relicense this project
https://github.com/chardet/chardet/issues/327
#HackerNews #NoRightToRelicense #ProjectIssues #OpenSourceLicensing #GitHubDiscussion #Chardet
I just saw a conversation of people discussing about a library. The library was "unfortunately" having MIT license. They were using #unlicense (https://unlicense.org/)
Is the MIT license somehow restrictive? I mean, I tend to avoid GNU GPL as it restricts people from using code in any way they want, namely as part of proprietary software. But do you see downsides in MIT license?
Is Font Awesome #opensource or are they #openwashing?
The free version is licensed under Creative Commons
Attribution 4.0 International, which is not an OSI-approved license:
https://opensource.org/licenses/
It's not software, so it's fine to use that license. But v4 was open source under SIL OFL 1.1.
I'm not a legal expert, but this seems to be source-available with a generous free license. Hence, open-washing? 🤔
Thoughts?