The Unlicense VS Creative Commons

It's theoretically helpful to at least put in a no-warranties clause. But sqlite as maybe the most popular public domain project worldwide doesn't (instead having a blessing). I mostly settled on the Unlicense https://unlicense.org/ over just saying 'public domain' or 'CC0' as a simple text blob to paste in, and in the event of a significant contribution from someone else, there's a simple text blurb to ask them... - Source: Hacker News / about 2 months ago

No, you're confused, because this is confusing: https://unlicense.org/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unlicense So if something is unlicensed (no license) you would be correct, but if something is unlicensed (unlicensed licence) you would be incorrect.. - Source: Hacker News / 4 months ago

CC0[0] would be the obvious one; spicier and less legalese alternatives that nonetheless amount to about the same thing include the Unlicense[1] and the Do What the Fuck You Want License[2] [0] https://creativecommons.org/share-your-work/public-domain/cc0/ [1] https://unlicense.org/ with some philosophical discussion at https://ar.to/2010/01/set-your-code-free [2] http://www.wtfpl.net/. - Source: Hacker News / 11 months ago

Interesting, looks like the Open Source Initiative decided to pull their endorsement of CC0 over the same clause. Apparently OSI decided to approve Unilicense as a public-domain equivalent license. Source: over 1 year ago

So its licensed on github under the Unlicenced License which TL:DR means anyone can modify it and publish it for any reason. Besides, I don't think a single line of code from the original FT UI mod is in my FT UI mod. At that point if you still consider it stealing, I don't know what to tell it, it only changes a single byte of code. Source: over 1 year ago

First, when I say open project, I mean, any project released under a license like GPL, any Open Source license, or a Creative Commons license. Not every project involves software development. There are projects that are related to the creation of multimedia content, like images, text, audio or video, and if you want that anyone has access, can redistribute the material or create derivative work, as it happens with... - Source: dev.to / 3 months ago

You can also look for assets under Creative Commons licenses (though you'll need to research the licenses as some require attribution or don't allow use in anything commercial or etc). Source: 5 months ago

You'll need to pick a specific license, not just generic open source. For this kind of thing, the usual recommendation is a creative commons liscence. They have a handy little tool to help you figure out which license is best for you. Source: 10 months ago

Regardless, there's a broader "free culture" movement with things like the Creative Commons licenses, etc facilitating a similar approach to other kinds of IP, like movies, music, etc. There are special open source licenses tailored to fonts and a whole ecosystem of open source fonts, for example. Source: 12 months ago

This is the entire reason the Creative Commons project exists: Copyright law is extremely strict, and CC licenses provide artists with an easy way to be more permissive with the rights to their works, while still being selective about what rights they retain, and while still remaining compliant with copyright law.... Source: 12 months ago