Re: [libreplanet-discuss] WTFPL Worse License Ever?

[Julien Kyou]

On December 18, 2015 9:32:15 PM EST, Julien Kyou <julien@thisyear.me> wrote:
>
>On 12/18/2015 01:35 PM, Mark Holmquist wrote:
>>
>> In any case, I'm curious about OP's opinions, because simply posting
>a
>> license and a few extracts from its website is a poor way to express
>an
>> argument. Facts are open to interpretation.
>>

I agree but I'm terrible at that so this is what happens

Anyways, I just don't like seeing open-source being abused. So when I learnt of 
this zero clause license, I felt sick.

>
>I guess I should have been clearer
>  this (for anyone how hasn't seen it) is the WTFPL
>
>  DO WHAT THE FUCK YOU WANT TO PUBLIC LICENSE
>                     Version 2, December 2004
>
>  Copyright (C) 2004 Sam Hocevar <sam@hocevar.net>
>
>  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.                                      <--[0]
>
>             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.                   <--[1]
>
>[0]meaning only this document not the licensed materials?
>
>[1]so basically closing the source is ok?
>

I was not really asking this, so much as pointing it out

>
>On 12/18/2015 06:43 AM, anonymiss wrote:
>>
>> Ah, it can get worse than this.
>> I have (luckily) forgotten the name, but there's one "open" source
>> license of one particular individual who excludes people from using
>the
>> software who don't fit in his (racist) view of the world or who live
>in
>> (long list of countries).
>>
>
>Ya. That looked pretty bad.
>
>
>  On 12/18/2015 01:37 PM, Aaron Wolf wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 12/18/2015 10:35 AM, Mark Holmquist wrote:
>>
>>> And there's nothing wrong with being anti-copyleft, copyleft has its
>>> problems, especially in the case of very small programs.
>>>
>>
>> FWIW, I respect the principled anti-copyleft views from
>> http://copyfree.org but they aren't trashingly anti-GPL or whatever,
>> they are promoting the idea of maximum compatibility and rejecting
>> copyright etc. largely.
>>
>
>Absolutely, I agree 'permissive-non-copyleft' has a place but for most 
>things I'd sooner just slap a GPL on and be done

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.