The Unlicense Reviews and details

Social recommendations and mentions

• French Court Issues Damages Award for Violation of GPL

  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

• Game-icons.net: Free icons for your games

  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

• We need more of Richard Stallman, not less

  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

• Scripting and licensing - Do bash scripts need a license?

  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

• Is there any controversy around the Eden Project mod?

  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

• Which one are you?

  CC0 isn’t intended for code and it’s a long license. Unlicense is intended for code and, in my opinion, is easier for a layman to read in full and understand because it’s shorter and has less legalese. Source: over 1 year ago

• Microsoft sued for open-source piracy through GitHub Copilot

  It's funny how companies can become their own worst enemy, which Microsoft has been since it acquired Github. Github itself recommends that you use the GPL license (see the Github-run https://choosealicense.com/). This has likely led to many projects choosing GPL/BSD/Apache/MIT by default, simply because the author didn't understand the differences between them. I've found that often, once people take the... - Source: Hacker News / over 1 year ago

• GPL vs MIT.

  The Unlicense achieves something similar and is specifically for software. And funnier imo. Source: over 1 year ago

• Do What the Fuck You Want to Public LicensE

  If the WTFPL is a bit too blue for you, you might prefer the Unlicense[0], it's what I tend to reach for when licensing projects these days. Compared to the WTFPL it's a bit more explicit about usage rights (but less explicit word-choice wise), and is basically equivalent in respect to the freedoms it provides. There's also the CC0[1] license, though I tend only to use that one for actual media, and not... - Source: Hacker News / over 1 year ago

• Tiramisu license?

  That's why public domain dedication things like CC0 and the Unlicense exist. (We like the Unlicense in particular for software.) Because otherwise, it's totally locked down even if the source is available and you don't /intend/ it to be locked down. Source: over 1 year ago

• Red Hat Legal on removing CC0 from "acceptable open source software licenses" in Fedora: "Over a long period of time a consensus has been building in FOSS that licenses that preclude any form of patent licensing or patent forbearance cannot be considered FOSS."

  I use the Unlicense for my small projects. Source: almost 2 years ago

• NiFTy Arcade Games No Longer Available on the Marketplace

  Note that it seems to have had at least one license applied at the time, The Unlicense, which per that page "[puts your] software project into the public domain"... However, it seems that the creator might've updated their project after the fact and added a second Creative Commons license specifically to the artistic assets (images, etc) of the game... Here's a comment I made yesterday detailing the ambiguity:. Source: almost 2 years ago

• So apperantly there's something going on with NiFTy's arcade game NFTs

  In this case, it looks like this game (and all its assets) may have been covered by The Unlicense at the time NiFTy paid for and downloaded it, which according to that page "[puts the] software project into the public domain"... So if that's the case (which is for them and their lawyers or whoever to work out) then NiFTy's clear here... Source: almost 2 years ago

• So apperantly there's something going on with NiFTy's arcade game NFTs

  As you can see, you can download the game (and all source materials) for a small price, and under the "More information" section (it's collapsed, you have to click to expand it) you can see there's a "License" (The Unlicense) and an "Asset license" (CC4-BY-NC-ND)... Source: almost 2 years ago

• v2.0.0 of "top 1000(ish) Finnish words" released — Sorry to clog the feed. A fan in Estonia offered me a case of beer to add autoplaying audio to the cards so she could study on the bus without looking down and I couldn't refuse

  All field content is under the CC BY-SA 3.0, since some of it uses Wiktionary content, and all formatting/CSS/JavaScript are done by me and under the Unlicense, aka, in the public domain. Source: almost 2 years ago

• Ask HN: Best License for OSS Project

  Public domain is controversial but has an extreme lack of friction: https://unlicense.org/. - Source: Hacker News / almost 2 years ago

• How to Deploy a Polygon (Matic) Smart Contract Tutorial

  The SPDX License Identifier lets other engineers know what they are allowed to do with your code. "Unlicense" means that your code is free to use by public domain. - Source: dev.to / about 2 years ago

• VARIK VALEFOR's "THROWTHOSEPICTURESDOWNTHELANE"

  "THROWTHOSEPICTURESDOWNTHELANE" is released in accordance with the Unlicense https://unlicense.org. Source: about 2 years ago

• Don’t use the Unlicense: it’s an inferior license wrapped in an atrocious name

  The way people and organizations stand in the way of public domain releases is beyond rude to the point of genuine evil. My code is just code. It should be possible to let all others read it without obligation. There must be some way to restrain this relentless desire to cocoon everything in layers of legal entanglement. It is just code and I as the author desire others to be able to read it. This is not a... - Source: Hacker News / about 2 years ago

• Ask HN: Are GitHub pull-requests governed by the original repository license?

  Line from every MIT-licensed project I've ever seen. A random contributor forks my repository and sends me a pull-request. They haven't altered the license file in any way. So, Question 1: are their contributions automatically licensed under the same MIT license as the original repository? (Note that their fork, which I'm being asked to merge, contains the identical license file.) Question 2: have they (almost... - Source: Hacker News / about 2 years ago

• Read the random sentence at the top right in the link in the description. How reasonable is your sentence?

  P.S. If the author of the site is watching, please add a license to the sentence generated, even the unlicense would do. Source: about 2 years ago