Copyleft licences are the only true free software licences. All other open source licenses are just proprietariable.
What do those words mean? What is proprietariable and copyleft? Or is that the joke?
Not a joke.
Copy left is like the Robin Hood of the copyright world. Basically, it’s a type of licensing where, sure, you can use, modify, and distribute the copyrighted work, but there’s a catch. You have to give the same rights to anyone else for any derivative works. So, if you modify the work, you can’t just slap a new copyright on it and restrict its use. It’s a way to ensure that the work stays free for everyone to use. It’s pretty popular in the open source community. It’s like copyright turned on its head, hence the name “copyleft”.
proprietariable just means the code can be taken and rerelased as proprietary (no freedoms all rights reserved).
deleted by creator
All that really does is guarantee that the professor will catch anyone cheating
would be easier than to try and catch people slipping eachother code, no?
Not pictured: OP and all their classmates failing the assignment and being investigated for plagiarism
Of course gigachad uses a thinkpad
This guy is a joke.
Based on commit history, you can prove that you did it originally
Free as in freedom
most new projects are in MIT?
My grades weren’t good enough so I license most of my code Community College Licence.
deleted by creator
None of these licenses give patent protection to your users. If you’re going “permissive”, you should use Apache.
deleted by creator
Why is too restrictive?
deleted by creator
If you use my snippet, I want your game. If you don’t agree, then you can’t use my snippet. The purpose of the GPL is simply to prevent people who don’t share from benefitting from people who do, which I think is pretty fair.
deleted by creator
You still own the code you release under GPL. the restriction you are describing is actually caused by the non-copyleft licences you claim to prefer. If you choose to use MIT, you are limiting which libraries you can use. If you had picked GPL to begin with, you can use any library.
deleted by creator
That seems a somewhat contrived example. Yes, it can theoretically happen - but in practice it would happen with a library, and most libraries are LGPL (or more permissive) anyway. By contrast, there have been plenty of stories lately of people who wrote MIT/BSD software, and then got upset when companies just took the code to add in their products, without offering much support in return.
Also, there’s a certain irony in saying what essentially amounts to, “Please license your code more permissively, because I want to license mine more restrictively”.
deleted by creator
This is part of why universities generally have it in the admissions agreement that the university will hold copyright over all that you do for your classes
Wow that’s shitty
