MIT is literally the best license

BSD also welcome.

GPL not allowed.

thanks

Other urls found in this thread:

cvsweb.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/src/share/misc/license.template?rev=HEAD
marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=120618313520730&w=2
openbsd.org/policy.html,
copyfree.org/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Brainlet here - what's the difference?

MIT is literally 1 step away from public domain.
You relinquish copyright interest in your work.
Big companies like it because it lets them take hobbyist code and incorporate it into their proprietary products without even giving attribution or contributing changes upstream back to the original project.

GPL is basically MIT except it explicitly prevents relicensing of code.

cuck license
it permits anyone to fuck your wife, and then make her their wife.

Fuck off MIT nigger

It means you can take any work with MIT license and do whatever you want with it.

It also means whatever you publish under MIT license means you have no rights whatsoever in whatever the end product will be.


With GPL, the license requires you to be liberal with the code and share the code with others.

proprietary license is best license

for me, it's ISC.

Copyright

Permission to use, copy, modify, and/or distribute this software for any purpose with or without fee is hereby granted, provided that the above copyright notice and this permission notice appear in all copies.

THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE AUTHOR DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES WITH REGARD TO THIS SOFTWARE INCLUDING ALL IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHOR BE LIABLE FOR ANY SPECIAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR ANY DAMAGES WHATSOEVER RESULTING FROM LOSS OF USE, DATA OR PROFITS, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, NEGLIGENCE OR OTHER TORTIOUS ACTION, ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE USE OR PERFORMANCE OF THIS SOFTWARE.

>MIT / BSD: Capitalist chad licenses
>GPL: Commie virgin license

I use Apache v2 for all my work

Every year I come back to this shithole, Sup Forums posts are dumber and dumber

This is completely and totally wrong

For the love of god, don't listen to people here. The MIT license and BSD license are only about a paragraph each, you can read and understand them on your own. The GPL licence is a bit more involved, but the short of it is its a viral license, and you need to make any code that includes GPL code freely available. Google for more details.

OpenBSD's ISC template here
cvsweb.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/src/share/misc/license.template?rev=HEAD

and Theo's comments here: marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=120618313520730&w=2
>Note even just using the word "license" creates confusion, since
>license implies contract law. Outside the US, the rest of the world
>does not use contract law for copyright. In the entire world,
>copyright grants you all rights to something until you surrender some
>rights, with a piece of text, but that text only loosely called a
>license.

also read the Copyright Law chapter in openbsd.org/policy.html, it is handy to have some overview what you default into.

MIT/BSD
>try years to make your wife love you
>some guy comes and clones your wife and gang bangs her with his friends
GPL
>anyone can see how hot your wife is but no one can touch her
>if someone wants to fuck your wife you can fuck their wifes as well
I was trying to make a point but i failed

Funny how GPL now dominates everywhere except the normies desktop, and you'r non-copyleft licensed OS is an irrelevent footnote in computing history.
And oh, if your "more free than gpl" code is part of a proprietary system, I don't wanna hear about it .. it's not free anymore, it's been cucked, so you lose. Cuck.

Public Domain is the only God approved "license".
Use it and you will have oversight authority similar to a building inspector or a person enforcing
the Americans with Disability Act -- Make commands, God signs-off with a
miraculous authentication from an oracle, and Intel, Microsoft or VMware obeys.

GPL
>>try years to make your wife love you
>>some guy comes and clones your wife and gang bangs her with his friends but you get to watch the video over and over, and you can use Chad's techniques to pleasure your wife as much as you want

>Public Domain is the only God approved "license".
Public Domain isn't recognized world wide

I don't think you know what GPL is at all
GPL means your code is readable, sharable, but if someone takes your code they have to make their code GPL as well, which means their modifications are also have to be readable and shareable

So if some nip programmer wants to use your code you chose to share the nip government goes after them or something?

that ain't ISC which is pretty much "public domain but don't sue us"

Still waiting for the virgin bsd license vs the Chad GPL license meme.

No, you will just never find out that he used your code.

>working for free

God will know. That's all that matters. That's the whole point of public domain. God will fuck them up worse than any public domain jew lawyer can.

>writing code for anyone but yourself
other people can do whatever with my code, I don't give a fuck.

Neither is Christianity but it's still the one true religion

>Permission to use, copy, modify, and/or distribute this software for any purpose with or without fee is hereby granted, provided that the above copyright notice and this permission notice appear in all copies.

better start using lsh instead of openssh, cuck

>uses a license by assholes that exploit the lifeboat clause to change it into shit that you never agreed to
>calls other people cuck

USA is basically BSD tho. GPL would be most european countries

>no right to bear arms
>no freedom of speech
I don't think so.

I like GPL. If I'm opening up my source, everyone who contribute should share their contributions, if you break this there's no point in open source development.

i prefer the freeware and idgaf licenses

Literally a cuckold's license.

Proprietary license: jail
Can't do anything here, you're trapped between four walls and all you can do is admire them.

MIT/BSD license: cuck shed
You see how Jamal fucks over your software(wife) and there is nothing you can do about it, but at least you get recognition of being its original creator(husband). Every fork of your program is literally your wife's son.

GPL: Gulag
You're literally forced to gift away your years of hard labor and force others to do the same while pretending it's true freedom.

>Every fork of your program is literally your wife's son.
It's the exact opposite though, it still contains my "genes" - it's just "raised" by someone else.

Also please stop using 'literally' figuratively.

bullshit
if you make changes to source on software, but you only use it in-house, you shouldn't be forced to release the changes

You don't have to with GPL.
You only have to give out the source to anyone you give the binaries to.

read the GPL
if you download GPL source and make changes to it, you must provide those changes

>tfw the cuck license is finally dying

You read it.
Only when you distribute the software, you have to provide the source.

This is also why web services can use in-house modified GPL code without releasing any code. This is why the Affero license was created.

that graph means nothing

sure thing rms

Apache 2.0 is the safest to use since it protects you against patent trolls who would otherwise try to rewrite history in order to fuck you over.

t. former WTFPL edgelord

I don't see in GPLv2 or v3 where I thought it required someone to redistribute their modifications. Maybe I confused that with Creative Commons or another license.

But it doesn't though. Jamal screws with his genes a little to make him darker, then passes him off as his own and everyone believes him rather than you because he's richer than you.

>nigger richer than anyone
Your analogies got way too weird

I have to agree, MIT is the best license, having to release a binary every time you make a change is retarded.

What can I say, jews would rather give jamal cash than you.

MIT/BSD = anarchy
GPL = constitutional freedom

Public Domain would be Anarchy.
MIT/BSD has a "constitution" and restrictions.

why would you use a license that allows people to steal your code for proprietary and closed sourced bullshit?

That's possible with both BSD and GPL licenses.
If you don't want people to steal your code don't do FOSS.

This. Either go with a permissible licence or keep it proprietary.

NOKEK license:

This software is provided "as is" and your only right, provided you've paid for it, is to use it in a personal capacity on your own system.

Actually, the best option is public domain, where you refuse to partake in the fallacy that is intellectual property. But yes, MIT is better than GPL, and if Stallman actually cared about freedom, he'd use it.

This, but you should attach a permissive license as a fallback

Public domain isn't a license: you can't dual license it. Once you put your code into the public domain, you don't have copyright over it, and therefore, you cannot license it. You can only license things you hold copyright to. This is where all licenses differ from public domain. MIT and GPL are more related than MIT is to public domain. But it is better to get as close to public domain as you can, if you can't do public domain itself.
I'm too afraid of what one poster mentioned above, to put things into public domain. So I use copyfree licenses.
>trolls who would otherwise try to rewrite history in order to fuck you over
In some countries, putting stuff into the public domain opens you up to someone copyrighting a derivative of the original public domain work, then trying to fuck you for your original work. It's unlikely but possible, given that most countries are capitalist, and therefore respect and honor this rude behavior.

You're confusing nips for chinks.

>.png

What license lets people do whatever the fuck they want with my code but they have to credit me in whatever they make with it?

Actually, I thought of one possibility that solves this. You can make a release or two of your work under a copyfree license like BSD, ISC, or MIT, then later give up your rights, putting it into the public domain for future releases. For example, you can release version 0.9 of your code under the MIT license, then 1.0 into the public domain. You can never go back to a license though.
What this ends up doing is that, for those few places which don't recognise public domain, they can use at least some version of your code.

Let me rephrase that then:
MIT/BSD = ancapism where businesses have every right to fuck you and if you disagree then you are a communist leech
GPL = constitutional freedom

Copyfree licenses, including BSD, MIT, and ISC.
copyfree.org/
It's only `an'cap if you haven't given capitalists the day of the rope yet. MIT license is as close as you can get to public domain, i.e. as close as you can get to communism, while still participating in the capitalist idea of intellectual property, or property itself.

Is there any sofware license that goes something like:
>strictly no botnet or sue the software dev
>something like gnu agpl so forkcucks btfo in jail

No botnet would make it not a free license, as a free license means permitting people to use your code for any and every purpose. Even for botnets and nuclear warfare.

That's fair enough. I can jump on the MIT train, as long as day of the rope comes first.

After the day of the rope, only public domain exists, though. Not even open source licenses, because there shall be no licenses.

What about MPL? It seems like a good middle ground between GPL and MIT/BSD. Why does nobody use it?

Exactly.