Hello license-discuss, On 11/08/2013 10:26 PM, Gregor Pintar wrote:
What do you think about this "crayon" license?
It reads to me like an ultra-permissive license, almost a public domain dedication in the form of a license. Personally, I find it an interesting license.
It has a copyright notice, but it does not require keeping it. This is unexpected (for me); I'm not sure why it asserts copyright. It also states it allows to "relicence".
Is it really intended to allow a full replacement/removal of license text and removal of copyright notice? It will have that effect...
No-Warranty. The statement is much simpler than for MIT, BSD, ISC, Unlicense, CC0, CC-BY. Personally, I'd suggest not "crayon"-ing that paragraph. I'd think you don't want it to fail.
Just my two cents. And two more... If I met it in the wild, I would treat this license like a MIT license for software, and similar for content. The text reads okay to me, and it seems more permissive than MIT/ISC. But I'm not sure it was indeed intended ultra-permissive (the licensor might have assumed the (c) notice has to stay!). Regardless, I'd treat it anyway like MIT...
_______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
