Change license to CC0?

[smartcontracts]

I'd like to propose changing our license to CC0, the "public domain" license. Not much different than MIT, but a little more accessible globally.

[Ro5s]

Yeah, CC0 has the most fulsome waiver language I've seen. Seems appropriate here (dealing with situation where some countries don't recognize releasing work into pub domain...). Advantages with retaining MIT seem to be (i) short and simple, (ii) widely used (comfort zone), + (iii) preserves copyright and legal notice. This author also had some interesting criticisms of CC0 vs. MIT on international perspective - - basically, CC0's fulsome language can be a double-edged sword by attempting, e.g., to waive certain 'moral rights' in Section 1(ii) (not copacetic in Norway, among others....).

At risk of veering into full navel-gazing territory: Open Source Initiative has a sorta ambivalent FAQ on this subject, as well, noting: "CC0 was not explicitly rejected, but the License Review Committee was unable to reach consensus that it should be approved, and Creative Commons eventually withdrew the application. The most serious of the concerns raised had to do with the effects of clause 4(a), which reads: 'No ... patent rights held by Affirmer are waived, abandoned, surrendered, licensed or otherwise affected by this document.'. While many open source licenses simply do not mention patents, it is exceedingly rare for open source licenses to explicitly disclaim any conveyance of patent rights, and the Committee felt that approving such a license would set a dangerous precedent, and possibly even weaken patent infringement defenses available to users of software released under CC0."

Edit: So, I think concern about CC0's patent language is less relevant for LearnPlasma. My bias however, would be to stick with MIT due to its (i) simplicity, (ii) lacks cloud of uncertainty.

These are pretty nifty comparisons on granular level: MIT vs. CC0.

[smartcontracts]

@Ro5s This is actually extremely interesting! I wasn't aware of any of these arguments and exactly how difficult it is to dedicate something into the public domain. Well, I think that's a strong argument to keep MIT instead of to move to CC0.