Hi,
When I came across this project I was surprised at how it is distributed under a relatively obscure license, instead of something more usual and simpler like MIT or BSD. I find the license text quite confusing because it does not mention software, and detail irrelevant concepts like "public performance", music, etc.
So I went looking for more information about whether it is suitable for a commercial application, and I found this on the Creative Commons official FAQ:
Q: "Can I use a Creative Commons license for software?"
A: "
Creative Commons licenses are not intended to apply to software. They should not be used for software. We strongly encourage you to use one of the very good software licenses available today. The licenses made available by the Free Software Foundation or listed at the Open Source Initiative should be considered by you if you are licensing software or software documentation. Unlike our licenses -- which do not make mention of source or object code -- these existing licenses were designed specifically for use with software."
http://wiki.creativecommons.org/FAQ#Can_I_use_a_Creative_Commons_license_for_software.3FThis sounds like a compelling reason to switch to a more appropriate license. What do the developers think?
(edited to add link to FAQ)
Show Posts
