[LAD] What KvR didn´t understand.

David Robillard d at drobilla.net
Mon Jan 7 15:28:12 UTC 2013

On Mon, 2013-01-07 at 14:20 +0100, Ove Karlsen wrote:
> The Beneficient Open-Source licence:
> http://paradoxuncreated.com/Blog/wordpress/?p=6198

This "license" is incredibly ambiguous and inadequate, so much so that
calling it "open source" is a bit of a stretch.

If you want to actually have your code be useful to people, use an
existing established (e.g. OSI/FSF certified) license so that people can
actually use it in projects without worry.  Vanity licenses are just a
pain for everybody; using them is the opposite of beneficent.

Copyright licenses are not the place for statements of intent,
hand-wavey language, and appeals "common sense".  Put that stuff
elsewhere and use a license that actually does the job of a licence.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.linuxaudio.org/pipermail/linux-audio-dev/attachments/20130107/2a14e39f/attachment.pgp>

More information about the Linux-audio-dev mailing list