open source copyright language

[tmetro-blu-5a1Jt6qxUNc at public.gmane.org (Tom Metro)]

Ben Eisenbraun wrote:
> Creative Commons is not considered suitable for software usually

Good to know.

It sounds like the distinction may be irrelevant if you don't care what 
others do with binaries generated from the source. Aside from 
disclaimers of liability (which may be absent from the CC licenses), the 
source itself could be treated like any other text.

But the FAQ makes a good point that there are an abundance of 
software-specific licenses to choose from. The big advantage to the CC 
approach is that their licenses are optimized for simplicity. I see they 
have "wrapped" a few common OSS licenses with a plain language summary. 
That might be a good middle ground.

  -Tom

-- 
Tom Metro
Venture Logic, Newton, MA, USA
"Enterprise solutions through open source."
Professional Profile: http://tmetro.venturelogic.com/