Licence to Code
Posted: 10 Apr 2017, 16:14
Hello, I'm thinking of releasing some AutoHotkey scripts.
Does anyone have any views on licences (licenses)? E.g. which is the best one. Do any have gaps?
In short, I don't want my users to face bureaucratic or financial hurdles to using my software in future.
Do we realistically need to worry about any of these things? E.g. disclaimers.
Are there advantages in not specifying a licence!?
Cheers.
==================================================
I searched all my ahk files for 'licen':
urls (after any redirection):
http://unlicense.org/
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0.html
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.html
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.txt
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/lgpl-2.1.txt
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/lgpl-3.0.html
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/lgpl.html
http://www.wtfpl.net/txt/copying/
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by ... /legalcode
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/publicdomain/
https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/
https://opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php
https://opensource.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.html
https://opensource.org/licenses/MIT
https://opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.php
https://opensource.org/licenses/zlib-license.php
old urls 1:
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/BSD/
redirects to:
https://opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php
old urls 2:
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/GPL/2.0/
redirects to:
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0.html
bonus urls:
http://phi.lho.free.fr/softwares/PhiLho ... icence.txt
http://www.autohotkey.net/~sumon/license.html
http://www.myfonts.com/viewlicense?type ... id=2164953
https://autohotkey.com/docs/license.htm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Lesse ... ic_License
https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sys ... 69936.aspx
bonus text:
; Licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0 -> http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/
; I waive compliance with the "Share Alike" condition of the license EXCLUSIVELY
; for these users:
not working:
http://autohotkey.net/~Tuncay/licenses/ ... tuncay.txt
http://www.autohotkey.net/~k3ph/license.txt
http://www.autohotkey.net/~Titan/license.txt
http://www.autohotkey.net/~Titan/zlib.txt
==================================================
[current popular licences]
Top Open Source Licenses | Black Duck Software
https://www.blackducksoftware.com/top-o ... e-licenses
Open source license usage on GitHub.com · GitHub
https://github.com/blog/1964-license-us ... github-com
Free software license - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software_license
List of free content licenses - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_f ... t_licenses
Comparison of free and open-source software licenses - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compariso ... e_licenses
==================================================
Does anyone have any views on licences (licenses)? E.g. which is the best one. Do any have gaps?
In short, I don't want my users to face bureaucratic or financial hurdles to using my software in future.
Do we realistically need to worry about any of these things? E.g. disclaimers.
Are there advantages in not specifying a licence!?
Cheers.
==================================================
I searched all my ahk files for 'licen':
urls (after any redirection):
http://unlicense.org/
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0.html
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.html
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.txt
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/lgpl-2.1.txt
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/lgpl-3.0.html
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/lgpl.html
http://www.wtfpl.net/txt/copying/
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by ... /legalcode
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/publicdomain/
https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/
https://opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php
https://opensource.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.html
https://opensource.org/licenses/MIT
https://opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.php
https://opensource.org/licenses/zlib-license.php
old urls 1:
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/BSD/
redirects to:
https://opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php
old urls 2:
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/GPL/2.0/
redirects to:
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0.html
bonus urls:
http://phi.lho.free.fr/softwares/PhiLho ... icence.txt
http://www.autohotkey.net/~sumon/license.html
http://www.myfonts.com/viewlicense?type ... id=2164953
https://autohotkey.com/docs/license.htm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Lesse ... ic_License
https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sys ... 69936.aspx
bonus text:
; Licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0 -> http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/
; I waive compliance with the "Share Alike" condition of the license EXCLUSIVELY
; for these users:
not working:
http://autohotkey.net/~Tuncay/licenses/ ... tuncay.txt
http://www.autohotkey.net/~k3ph/license.txt
http://www.autohotkey.net/~Titan/license.txt
http://www.autohotkey.net/~Titan/zlib.txt
==================================================
[current popular licences]
Top Open Source Licenses | Black Duck Software
https://www.blackducksoftware.com/top-o ... e-licenses
Open source license usage on GitHub.com · GitHub
https://github.com/blog/1964-license-us ... github-com
Free software license - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software_license
List of free content licenses - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_f ... t_licenses
Comparison of free and open-source software licenses - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compariso ... e_licenses
==================================================