Skip to content

clarify 0BSD as no-attribution requirement license #16

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
hannob wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

clarify 0BSD as no-attribution requirement license #16

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
14 changes: 9 additions & 5 deletions README.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -387,15 +387,19 @@ In addition to this failure to address patents,
CC0 also has a weaker defense against liability lawsuits
(it lacks a statement like
"in no event shall (authors or copyright holders) be held liable...").
In short: another license would be a far better choice for software.
I recommend using the [MIT](https://spdx.org/licenses/MIT.html) license instead of CC0 for software, as it's a small yet widely-used permissive

In short: another license would be a far better choice for software. If your intention is
to release code with the least amount of restrictions, with no attribution requirement,
you can release your code under the OSI-approved
[0BSD](https://opensource.org/license/0bsd/) license.

A recommended simple software licenses with attribution requirement is the
[MIT](https://spdx.org/licenses/MIT.html) license, as it's a small yet widely-used permissive
license.
The [MIT license expressly grants all necessary permissions, including copyright and patents](https://opensource.com/article/18/3/patent-grant-mit-license).
Reasonable alternatives if you want *short* permissive software licenses include
[BSD-2-Clause (the BSD 2-clause "Simplified" License)](https://spdx.org/licenses/BSD-2-Clause.html),
[BSD-3-Clause (BSD 3-clause "New" or "Revised" License)](https://spdx.org/licenses/BSD-3-Clause.html),
and
[0BSD](https://opensource.org/license/0bsd/).
and [BSD-3-Clause (BSD 3-clause "New" or "Revised" License)](https://spdx.org/licenses/BSD-3-Clause.html).
The [Apache License 2.0](https://spdx.org/licenses/Apache-2.0.html) is also
a reasonable choice as a permissive license, though it's longer and there are
some complications when combining it with GPL version 2.0.
Expand Down