Thank you so much, Lukas.
That's my main question in this mailing list.
I'm not sure if I'll be using this license in the future in some
software. I'm evaluating advantages and disvantages.
Thanks to all people by the comments.
Regards.
Lukas Atkinson writes:
> [1:multipart/alternative Hid
>> Not only that, but the Working Class License itself is a blatant violation
>> of the FSF's copyright, unless the author has a private license from the FSF
>> to create such a thing (which I do not believe, as it fails to acknowledge
>> the FSF in any way). As the GPL says right at the top: "
On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 7:02 AM Brendan Hickey
wrote:
> "You can legally use the GPL terms (possibly modified) in another license
> provided that you call your license by another name and do not include the
> GPL preamble, and provided you modify the instructions-for-use at the end
> enough to m
This came up with the SSPL. From the FSF:
"You can legally use the GPL terms (possibly modified) in another license
provided that you call your license by another name and do not include the
GPL preamble, and provided you modify the instructions-for-use at the end
enough to make it clearly differe
On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 6:01 AM Lukas Atkinson
wrote:
You are clearly not trying to create an open source license because the
> license discriminates against certain persons: against those who you do not
> deem “working class”. Compare OSD #5 specifically, and the Free Software
> Definition more
You are clearly not trying to create an open source license because the
license discriminates against certain persons: against those who you do not
deem “working class”. Compare OSD #5 specifically, and the Free Software
Definition more generally.
Such discrimination may or may not be ethical, but
Hello,
I'm inventing a new license and I would like receive feedback about it.
https://github.com/davidam/workingclasslicense/blob/master/WCL
Thanks in advance.
--
https://cienciabasura.wordpress.com/
http://libremanuals.net/
___
License-discuss m
