31–40 of 148 posts
This is a minor nitpick and shouldn't be read as an overall criticism of the author or this post, which is better than the one I did. However, I will note that non-infringement and title are, in fact, implied warranties in the UCC. I'm not sure why the author missed it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think most of this (other than the historical references) is in reference to the effective “strong minimum standards” of the Berne Convention, and to the later treaties established between WIPO member nations. Therefore, it’s almost † globally applicable. † From Wikipedia, WIPO non-members: Kosovo, Federated States of Micronesia, Palau, South Sudan, and the states with limited recognition. Palestine has observer st…
The devil is, however, most often in the details. Lines such as > United States law calculates copyright terms differently for individual and “corporate” authors. make me wonder what it is like in, say, France or Germany.
One can sell or give permission the right to publish, duplicate, whatever (Verwertungsrecht).
Writing a book on company time and money automatically awards the company the rights to publish, make money, etc.
Writing a book in you spare time with "work related knowledge" might award the company with a claim for buying (at fair value) the publishing rights.
If you write a bestseller on company time you might also be entitled to a compensation in addition to your payrole. (But always best to have a contract beforehand)
But on the whole Germany is in the Berne convention.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
GP comment did not imply that half of elements are below average. It just said that _some_ have to be. By definition, we cannot have all elements be above average: at least one has to be below.
The average (median, mode, rounded mean) package of a dozen eggs contains 12 yolks. Occasionally there are 13 or even 14. Some packages intentionally contain 24. Vanishingly few if any contain 11 or fewer yolks.
> The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software. What’s the reasoning behind asking users to carry around a notice? Why not just let users go without it? Is it for legal reasons or for crediting the authors? I’ve released MIT licensed software before and frankly when someone is using my code, I really don’t care about credit or leaving be…
>I really don’t care about credit or leaving behind a legacy or such things. Then use a different license. In 1-clause BSD and Boost licenses the requirement of preserving copyright notices applies only to source code, while 0BSD and CC0 don't require that at all.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The devil is, however, most often in the details. Lines such as > United States law calculates copyright terms differently for individual and “corporate” authors. make me wonder what it is like in, say, France or Germany.
In Germany Copyright (Urheberrecht) is always with the original author and can not be sold or given to somebody else. It can be inherited. One can sell or give permission the right to publish, duplicate, whatever (Verwertungsrecht). Writing a book on company time and money automatically awards the company the rights to publish, make money, etc. Writing a book in you spare time with "work related knowledge" might awar…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>I really don’t care about credit or leaving behind a legacy or such things. Then use a different license. In 1-clause BSD and Boost licenses the requirement of preserving copyright notices applies only to source code, while 0BSD and CC0 don't require that at all.
Thanks. I was wondering which license actually satisfies "Don't care" philosophy and gets me out of any legal responsibility/liability.
DO WHAT THE FUCK YOU WANT TO PUBLIC LICENSE
Version 2, December 2004
Copyright (C) 2004 Your Name
Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim or modified
copies of this license document, and changing it is allowed as long
as the name is changed.
DO WHAT THE FUCK YOU WANT TO PUBLIC LICENSE
TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR COPYING, DISTRIBUTION AND MODIFICATION
0. You just DO WHAT THE FUCK YOU WANT TO.Earlier quoted context omitted.
The average (median, mode, rounded mean) package of a dozen eggs contains 12 yolks. Occasionally there are 13 or even 14. Some packages intentionally contain 24. Vanishingly few if any contain 11 or fewer yolks.
With all due respect, you are just trying really hard to be pedantic. Your convoluted, contorted, corner-case example does not invalidate anything that was said here. You even had to resort to the word "rounded" to make it work. Without "rounded", most would be below mean.
this is the pedantic part. Normal usage of average means "pretty much what I expected", which is what they are trying to convey, imo.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The average (median, mode, rounded mean) package of a dozen eggs contains 12 yolks. Occasionally there are 13 or even 14. Some packages intentionally contain 24. Vanishingly few if any contain 11 or fewer yolks.
With all due respect, you are just trying really hard to be pedantic. Your convoluted, contorted, corner-case example does not invalidate anything that was said here. You even had to resort to the word "rounded" to make it work. Without "rounded", most would be below mean.
In any case, "average" does not mean "arithmetic mean." It means, mathematically, any of the median, mode, or mean or in standard vernacular, of typical or usual characteristics (i.e., close to mode).
You don't get to just arbitrarily pick a definition that fits your viewpoint and start going "all due respect" on other people.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This line confused me for a while, because it looked like a copyleft provision to me.
It's not copy left, but users have the right to see the license "tree" if you will of all the things you've built your code with. I think, as others have pointed out in the replies, 0BSD or MIT-0 is more suitable for me.
Why not go with [CC0] in that case? It's a lot more robust, and recommended by the FSF over options like the Unlicense.