-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Please add a License.txt #1
Comments
Most likely follow AudioKit’s trajectory. I think they were Apache, but seems now to be MIT. Will look into it.
… On Mar 31, 2024, at 11:47 PM, David J. Kordsmeier ***@***.***> wrote:
Hi - it would be great if you could add a license file to this project and dependent projects. While the selection is up to you, a permissive academic license is great (MIT, Apache, BSD). If you prefer GPL copyleft licenses, a dual license is most flexible if you would like to engage in an approach for commercialization (with GPL + commercial license options you can be assured nobody can run off with anything without contributing back any source they distribute, and most real corporate lawyers would block GPLv2+ use in anything distributed for profit). If you are the sole contributor you will always have control over licensing decisions (including changing your mind about the license). I look forward to trying out the software and I am willing to contribute back what I can. Personally I put most of my non-customer work under Apache, BSD-3 clause, or MIT/X. I'd rather see more people using software than having to get lawyers to review if it is possible.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#1>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AACHBTZECGXFRPKBQI7M2ILY3D7I3AVCNFSM6AAAAABFRFA2AWVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43ASLTON2WKOZSGIYTONRVGMYTOMQ>.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
|
MIT Non-AI |
Interesting ... is it this? https://github.com/bmitc/mit-no-ai-license I haven't seen this license before. It isn't based on anything listed in the OSI database. |
… On May 6, 2024, at 5:11 PM, David J. Kordsmeier ***@***.***> wrote:
Interesting ... is it this? https://github.com/bmitc/mit-no-ai-license
I haven't seen this license before. It isn't based on anything listed in the OSI database.
https://opensource.org/licenses?ls=mit
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#1 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AACHBT6WT3KQEZEODB3XPUDZBAL4FAVCNFSM6AAAAABFRFA2AWVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDAOJXGEZDSMRQGI>.
You are receiving this because you commented.
|
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Hi - it would be great if you could add a license file to this project and dependent projects. While the selection is up to you, a permissive academic license is great (MIT, Apache, BSD). If you prefer GPL copyleft licenses, a dual license is most flexible if you would like to engage in an approach for commercialization (with GPL + commercial license options you can be assured nobody can run off with anything without contributing back any source they distribute, and most real corporate lawyers would block GPLv2+ use in anything distributed for profit). If you are the sole contributor you will always have control over licensing decisions (including changing your mind about the license). I look forward to trying out the software and I am willing to contribute back what I can. Personally I put most of my non-customer work under Apache, BSD-3 clause, or MIT/X. I'd rather see more people using software than having to get lawyers to review if it is possible.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: