Hacker News Reader

How is this different from an impolite MIT license?

Edit: also, for the interested, there is a free e-book from O'Reilly explaining the major free software licenses http://oreilly.com/openbook/osfreesoft/book/index.html

View on HN

Thanks for the link. I remember how much trouble I had trying to pick a license when I first released code (even though it wasn't a big project or likely to be used by many people). I think I finally made my decision through research on StackOverflow and Wikipedia. This book would have been very useful.

the main difference is that this essentially places the work in the public domain, where the MIT license means it's freely available, but the copyright is still the creator's. Also, thou have to retain the MIT license and distribute it with all subsequent works.

I don't think this is true. MIT explicitly allows sublicensing, meaning you can essentially just change the license on any derivative. The copyright notice needs to remain, though.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com