Re: [dev] picture

On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 12:56 PM, anonymous <ake7zefe_AT_lavabit.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 09:46:12PM +0200, ⚖ Alexander "Surma" Surma wrote:
>> I was just about to ask, Creatives Common BY-SA?
>
> Already discussed on this list, but for software instead of art.
> Unlicense[1] for software,

While in principle I like the idea of the 'unlicense', its legal value
is very questionable. For software and code sticking with the classic
BSD/MIT/ISC licenses is a much better idea.

I personally 'dual-license' my code as ISC and then release it to the
public domain.

uriel

> CC0[2] for art if you want to place your
> work into "public domain" and allow anyone do to anything with it.
>
> [1] http://unlicense.org/
> [2] http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/
>
>
>
Received on Mon Jun 21 2010 - 16:27:57 UTC