Felyza Wishbringer writes:
> Would this be better wording?
I don't have a lot of interest in constructing new license texts, since
I much prefer that all software distributors avoid unnecessary license
proliferation.
Please, instead of constructing new licenses, use an existing
widely-used well
Le Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 07:02:53PM -0400, Felyza Wishbringer a écrit :
> Would this be better wording?
>
> "2. Nobody is liable for what .. you do with it"
Dear Felyza,
I think that unfortunately, there is no possiblity to have a license that is
short and fun / satyrical / provocative / …, and a
Would this be better wording?
"2. Nobody is liable for what .. you do with it"
> The WTFPL goes beyond disclaimer to place liability on the licensee.
> That's an unusual step, and I'm not convinced that it preserves the
> recipient's freedom.
--
-Felyza
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-leg
Felyza Wishbringer writes:
> My reading and understanding is that they are basically the same.
The significant difference is that the GPL does not place liability
anywhere; it only disclaims liability for the licensor. The same goes
for all other widely-used free software licenses.
The WTFPL go
Hi Sam,
On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 23:59:23 +0200
Sam Hocevar wrote:
> > Regardless of any consideration about the license spirit, I read the
> > copyright notice (Copyright (C) 2004 Sam Hocevar ) as
> > applying to the license text, not to the licensed work.
> >
> > See for instance
> > http://pac
On Tue, 27 Sep 2011 15:17:13 -0400 Felyza Wishbringer wrote:
> My reading and understanding is that they are basically the same.
I am not convinced...
>
> From the GPLv2, it states that the copyright holder (author) and
> anyone who modifies or redistributes the code cannot be held liable to
>
My reading and understanding is that they are basically the same.
>From the GPLv2, it states that the copyright holder (author) and
anyone who modifies or redistributes the code cannot be held liable to
you for damages.
>From the proposed WTFPLv3, it states You are solely liable for 'what
you do
On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 21:27:11 -0400 Felyza Wishbringer wrote:
[...]
> My proposed WTFPLv3 (2011)
> http://gamingtools.com/WTFPLv3.txt
> Which changed name of the license and copyright. and add 2
> terms&conditions statements
> Updated from earlier today... a change to T&C 1, which now states: You
>
Since this has sparked some interesting debate over the wording, for reference:
WTFPLv1.0 (2000)
http://repo.or.cz/w/wmaker-crm.git/blob/refs/heads/master:/COPYING.WTFPL
WTFPLv1.1 (2010?)
https://www.ohloh.net/licenses/wtfpl_1_1
http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/threadmill.git/plain/COPYING.WTFPL
On Mon, Sep 26, 2011, Francesco Poli wrote:
> > Added Sam, and I hope he doesn't mind, as I think he's the one which can
> > give the best answer to this.
>
> That's OK with me.
>
> > On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 21:29:20 +0200
> > Francesco Poli wrote:
> >
> > > > DO WHATEVER THE DUCK YOU
On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 22:41:15 +0200 Ricardo Mones wrote:
>
> Hi,
Hi Ricardo! (Hi Sam!)
>
> Added Sam, and I hope he doesn't mind, as I think he's the one which can
> give the best answer to this.
That's OK with me.
>
> On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 21:29:20 +0200
> Francesco Poli wrote:
>
> >
Hi,
Added Sam, and I hope he doesn't mind, as I think he's the one which can
give the best answer to this.
On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 21:29:20 +0200
Francesco Poli wrote:
> > DO WHATEVER THE DUCK YOU WANT TO PUBLIC LICENSE
> > Version 3, September 2011
> >
On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 01:16:34PM -0400, Felyza Wishbringer wrote:
> I am planning on submissions to a project that is looking to finish up
> their Debian legality. I found a license that pretty much works, but I
> don't like that it has no warranty disclaimer. So, I modified it per
> the license
On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 09:45:58PM +0200, Simon Chopin wrote:
[...]
> Actually, if you read Sam Hocevar's FAQ webpage about the WTFPL[1], this
> issue is adressed by adding a separate disclaimer. It seems pretty hard
> to miss. I must add that most of the time I see this licence used for
> program
On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 13:16:34 -0400 Felyza Wishbringer wrote:
[...]
> I found a license that pretty much works, but I
> don't like that it has no warranty disclaimer. So, I modified it per
> the license allowance, but I want an official 'yes its okay'.
[...]
> First, per the code of conduct, I am m
I am planning on submissions to a project that is looking to finish up
their Debian legality. I found a license that pretty much works, but I
don't like that it has no warranty disclaimer. So, I modified it per
the license allowance, but I want an official 'yes its okay'.
It's very short.
First,
16 matches
Mail list logo
