Alternative Licensing

[ismaell]

Please provide an alternative licensing option.

Public Domain is harmful/problematic, because it's regulated differently depending on the country, and in some the regime requires payment. E.g. in Argentina and Uruguay, any use of the work, even non-commercial, requires paying a fee to the state, so lawful use is impaired, and crearly against the intent/spirit of putting it in PD.

[mndrix]

If there is a change to the license (which I support), my vote is for 0BSD. Its terms come close to the intent of public domain. I also enjoy that the license text is not viral.

[josephholsten]

Some guidance about the above: http://copyfree.org/policy/public

I’m also a fan of 0BSD (which copyfree.org calls the Toybox License) or ISC. Applying a license to new distribution methods of works previously in public domain is generally considered fine. (See the 0BSD page, “But if some random third party takes public domain code and slaps some other license on it, then it's fine.” That second link is to gnuzip as distributed by Apple. If FSF & Apple think it’s acceptable, we can too.)

[SirWumpus]

0BSD is good as a clearer public domain license, though maybe a BSD-1-clause license would be better and can be used to at least provide author(s) credit.

[ismaell]

IANAL, but I'm not sure if you can remove a copyright notice no matter the license (unless perhaps if it explicitly gives you that permission), so that clause in BSD-1-license might be redundant...