21–24 of 24 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The lack of attribution here is refreshing. I am sick of living in a world where all ideas have to be meticulously accounted for.
It is also against the spirit of CC, and also against CC BY 3.0, which Gopher is licensed under. If you don't like attributing, do not use things licensed under CC. It's that simple.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think in CC BY 3.0, as long as proper attribution is given, license of derivative works can be changed. Licensor cannot revoke adaptation rights, as long as attribution is given, even for commercial use. So the use of WTFPL is fine here, but the lack of attribution renders CC BY 3.0 non-applicable, and hence makes this repo a copyright infringement.
That's pretty much what I was trying to say... you can decline to add more license to your own work, and decline to ask for your own attribution, but you can't erase the underlying license and WTFPL the whole thing, as the only license.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's pretty much what I was trying to say... you can decline to add more license to your own work, and decline to ask for your own attribution, but you can't erase the underlying license and WTFPL the whole thing, as the only license.
We have already added licensing. Now it must be ok.
See here: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/
> If supplied, you must provide the name of the creator and attribution parties, a copyright notice, a license notice, a disclaimer notice, and a link to the material.
For reference, here is how official Golang README puts it:
> The Go gopher was designed by Renee French. (http://reneefrench.blogspot.com/)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is also against the spirit of CC, and also against CC BY 3.0, which Gopher is licensed under. If you don't like attributing, do not use things licensed under CC. It's that simple.
What if you are also against adhering to license terms?