D demoscene compo

Don nospam at nospam.com
Tue Mar 17 05:37:27 PDT 2009


Christopher Wright wrote:
> Don wrote:
>> Clay Smith wrote:
>>> Don wrote:
>>>> BCS wrote:
>>>>> Hello ponce,
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Source code will be released soon under the WTFPL 
>>>>>
>>>>> LOL, now /that's/ a license I can work with!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Why isn't there a version of that with non-offensive wording????
>>>> There's a hundred nearly-identical software licenses out there, but 
>>>> that's the only one I've seen that actually tries to be public domain.
>>>
>>> You can relicense it however you want to.
>> Yes, but that involves creating a new license. Which is the worst 
>> possible choice.
> 
> No, you can take a WTFPL work and include it in a GPL'd work without 
> changing the license.
> 
> You can't, however, sue someone for violating the GPL if they use only 
> the WTFPL portions of the GPL'd work, because you don't own the 
> copyright, and therefore you lack both standing in the court and the 
> ability to restrict others' usage of the work.

No, I mean I want to release code under the same conditions as the WTFPL 
license, but with less offensive wording. I can't do this without 
creating a new license. Every other license seems to have a silly "this 
notice may not be removed" clause. I'm only including a license for the 
benefit of the users, not for myself. With all the stuff people say 
about how there are legal ambiguities with public domain, I just find it 
unbelievable that there's no "formalized public domain" license.


More information about the Digitalmars-d-bugs mailing list