Colin Walters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Thu, 2005-05-19 at 13:22 -0400, Jason Vas Dias wrote: > > > The spec file says it all: 'distributable', which > > sums up my attitude to licensing. > > There are intentionally no Copyrights or licensing > > statements anywhere in the source code. > > It sounds like what you want then is to place it in the "public domain", > which gives up any copyright interest in the work. The traditional way > AIUI is to simply add a note which looks something like this: > > foo.c; written by Jason Vas Dias > This file is hereby placed in the public domain. > > See also: > > http://creativecommons.org/licenses/publicdomain/ > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_domain
(IANAL, and I'm probably going to regret wading into this, but...) As I understand it, the public domain isn't actually all that great for code. It's really only suitable for code snippets/code examples. People can take the code, make minimal changes to it, and copyright and represent it as their own. Additionally, most standard licenses have a good warranty disclaimer -- the public domain does not. The Academic Free License is a pretty good BSD-style license, if that's what you're looking for: http://www.opensource.org/licenses/academic.php though putting this particular project under the GNU GPL makes a lot more sense to me. Thanks, -Jonathan _______________________________________________ NetworkManager-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/networkmanager-list
