Hi all!
I am an open source project maintainer and I was referred to this
mailing list recently as a good place to ask questions.
I was recently told by a community member that I should not be using
the term "Open Source" as it has legal implications and the project
doesn't fully embrace tha
I think the proper language would be to grant rights to parents that are
"necessarily practiced in the work as issued by the grantor". Because of
course anyone can modify the work to exercise any patent claim you happen
to own.
CC0 was never all that strong. It is probably going to be parsed in co
You can call your project “open source” as long as you are clear about the paid
portion.
Just to avoid all sorts of headaches for your downstream, users, and public
position, keep the open source core portion in one git repo, and then keep the
paid add-on in a *different* git repo, with build t
If you have “I need to protect myself” or submarine patent license concerns,
just release it under Apache-2.0, and then act like you released it as PD.
You really can’t PD it and “protect yourself”. But if your intent is to let it
be widely used, widely read, under terms that are well understoo
