Changed my license opinion once again, now in favour of WTFPL.

This commit is contained in:
Niels G. W. Serup 2013-01-31 20:59:45 +01:00
parent ac0d9c4923
commit ff62e1afca
11 changed files with 126 additions and 41 deletions

View File

@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
#+title: About metanohi
#+summary: A short description of what metanohi is
#+license: bysa
#+license: wtfpl
#+startup: showall
#&toc
* About metanohi
@ -22,19 +23,19 @@ widget on the propaganda page, might cease to work).
** Copying
In general, text, images, and other media on metanohi is licensed under the
[[http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/][Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0]] license, a *copyleft*
license. There may be cases with other licenses. The status of a page can be
seen in the bottom in a metadata box. If no license is specified in the box,
it's either because someone forgot to apply one to the page, or it's because
the page has almost no content (like the "Page not found" page) and does not
really require a license.
In general, text, images, code and any other type of work on metanohi are
available under the [[http://www.wtfpl.net/][Do What The Fuck You Want To Public License (WTFPL)]]; read
about this choice [[/writings/non-copylefted][here]]. There may be cases with other licenses. The status of
a page can be seen in the bottom in a metadata box. If no license is specified
in the box, it's either because I forgot to apply one to the page, or it's
because the page has almost no content (like the "Page not found" page) and does
not really require a license.
#+caption: Free cultural works
#&img;url=/img/licenses/freecontent.png, float=right
Most of metanohi's content can be defined as free cultural works, as defined by
[[http://freedomdefined.org/][freedomdefined.org]].
[[http://freedomdefined.org/][freedomdefined.org]]. Most of it is also [[http://copyfree.org/][copyfree]].
In all cases, you are free to redistribute content from metanohi, but please
don't set up a mirror for no reason (who would do that, anyway?).
@ -42,19 +43,10 @@ don't set up a mirror for no reason (who would do that, anyway?).
External content is sometimes a different matter. [[./media-licenses][A list of licenses for media]]
is used for attributing in cases where it is impractical to attribute in-page.
If you take something from metanohi that is not under a public-domain-like
license, you are required to attribute Niels G. W. Serup and metanohi. When
doing that, write something like "Niels G. W. Serup, [[http://metanohi.name/][metanohi.name]]".
If you use something from metanohi, please attribute Niels G. W. Serup and
metanohi (unless it's not by Niels, which is rare). When doing that, write
something like "Niels G. W. Serup, [[http://metanohi.name/][metanohi.name]]".
A few pages, like [[/projects/][this one]], have a lot of Python code for in-page evaluation
and execution. This might not be the most secure thing to allow, but since only
one person can change it, it is deemed safe enough. Any such nontrivial code is
licensed under the same license as [[/projects/mege/][mege]], i.e. AGPLv3+, unless otherwise
noted. This might seem like overkill in some situations, but with only one
license in use, simplicity is achieved.
Note that the CC BY-SA license is used by default, which is why even pages with
no more than two lines bear that license.
** Source

View File

@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
#+title: JavaScript License Information
#+summary: A table of the JavaScript used on metanohi
#+license: cc0
#+license: wtfpl
* JavaScript License Information

View File

@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
#+title: Links
#+summary: Various links.
#+license: cc0
#+license: wtfpl
#+startup: showall
#++show
#+BEGIN_SRC javascript
@ -14,7 +15,7 @@
* Hyperlinks
My first web pages from ~2004 contained pages whose only purpose was to show
My first web pages from ca. 2004 contained pages whose only purpose was to show
links to other sites, because that's what you use websites for. With this page I
intend to carry on with this tradition.
@ -66,5 +67,4 @@ Beware, for the following Hyperlinks contain Knowledge!
[fn:oxymoron] "Passive activism" is an oxymoron. Activism is, of course, not a
passive thing. But having links stowed on the front of one's web page
certainly is.
passive thing. But links stowed on a web page certainly is.

View File

@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
#+title: About Niels
#+summary: A short description of metanohi's creator
#+license: bysa
#+license: wtfpl
#+startup: showall
#&toc
* About Niels
@ -172,9 +173,12 @@ EOTFhRXYSWReVaHWxduolu5YplmQHYj1LtGm4p6659ymKr80tzWAg3LK7AzDXRQ+
** Photo
#&img;url=img/niels-eyes.png, width=600, center, caption=Niels
#&img;url=img/niels-eyes.png, width=600, center, caption=Niels (kind of)
** Misc.
#&img;url=img/fsfmember.png, medlink=http://www.fsf.org/associate/support_freedom/join_fsf?referrer=8085
(I'm not currently a member due to my student economy, but I might become a
member again later on.)

BIN
site/img/licenses/wtfpl.png Normal file

Binary file not shown.

After

Width:  |  Height:  |  Size: 2.9 KiB

View File

@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
#+title: Home
#+title: Beginning
#+summary: This is the start page.
#+license: cc0
#+license: wtfpl
* Meta-meta-meta-meta-meta-metanohi!
@ -18,7 +18,7 @@ If you're not the type who crawls through the entirety of a website when you
visit it, here's the author's pick of metanohi pages you should read:
+ <@eval macros.titlelink('/writings/atem')@>
+ <@eval macros.titlelink('/writings/software-licenses')@>
+ <@eval macros.titlelink('/writings/non-copylefted')@>
+ [[http://suum.metanohi.name/][SUUM]]
+ <@eval macros.titlelink('/projects/sleinlib')@>
+ <@eval macros.titlelink('/projects/magicng')@>

View File

@ -2,8 +2,8 @@
#&summary
An esoteric programming language with compiler/interpreter
#&
#+license: bysa, text
#+license: agpl 3+, program
#+license: wtfpl
#+startup: showall
#&toc
* Half-Broken Car in Heavy Traffic
@ -107,9 +107,7 @@ output as a text string instead of a list of numbers.
** Download
hbcht is released under the AGPLv3+.
[[hbcht-0.1.0.tar.gz][Download]].
hbcht is released under the WTFPL. [[hbcht-0.1.0.tar.gz][Download]].
hbcht can also be found in the [[http://pypi.python.org/pypi/hbcht][Python Package Index]]. hbcht has its code at
Gitorious; see [[http://gitorious.org/hbcht]].

View File

@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
#+title: My BASH prompt
#+title: My BASH prompt (outdated)
#&summary
What my prompt used to do and what it looked like.
#&

View File

@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
#+title: Free software
#+summary: An explanation of the necessity of free software
#+license: bysa
#+startup: showall
#+license: cc0
* Free software
@ -12,7 +13,7 @@ print(inp.lower())
Or at least it's a very small part of one. It reads text input from a user,
transforms the text to lowercase, and prints the transformed text. It is very
simple. Larger programs are often far less simple, as they may contain
implementations of complex algorithms or involve human interaction.
implementations of complex algorithms or involve human interaction.
[[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RSA][RSA]] and [[http://www.openssl.org/][OpenSSL]] are examples of this, RSA being an algorithm which requires
several subalgorithms to work, and OpenSSL being the large implementation of

View File

@ -0,0 +1,84 @@
#+title: My works, non-copylefted
#&summary
Why I don't use copyleft for my own works.
#&
#+startup: showall
#+license: wtfpl
A few months ago, I went from using the GPL for most of my software to BSD3;
read about it [[/writings/software-licenses][here]]. I chose to continue to use Creative Commons
Attribution-ShareAlike for most of my non-software works.
Now, I have chosen to stop copylefting my original works entirely.
I do this not because of a change in my general view of copyleft, but because I
don't see myself ever using the legal benefits of copyleft; I can still
understand why someone would choose to use copyleft to challenge copyright,
fighting fire with fire, but it's just not something I would do.
The power of copyright lies in whether people accept the terms that an author
puts forth, and that, if the copyright is abused, the author uses the law to
punish the abusers. The same is essentially true for copyleft. So, if I
release a work under e.g. Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike, and someone
derives a new work from that and does not copyleft that, I have the power to
make them change that decision; I could contact them and try to convince them to
be nice and free their work; I could contact them and say they *must* free the
work because of the law; and I could even /sue/ them for not freeing their work!
Until now I have, without really realizing it, used copyleft licenses only for
the signal they send: If you create something new from something I have made
free, please make your work free as well. I never thought about what would
happen and what I would do if someone broke the law and didn't follow my
copyleft. I probably should have thought about that at the beginning, but hey,
I just wanted to make my works freely available and modifiable and hope that
others would do the same!
While I don't think it is wrong to use even lawsuits for upholding copyleft,
it's not something I would /ever/ do. If someone takes a copylefted work and
abuses it, the community does not lose works; it simply does not gain them.
Arguing against this argument would be the same as asserting that Hollywood
loses money when people do not pay for digital, made-at-no-cost copies of their
films -- a view I certainly don't agree with.
Of course, I might never have to enter a lawsuit to uphold copyleft. Maybe just
asking the abuser would be enough in all cases. But since this very page is
public, the abuser would realize that I don't intend to sue in any case, so they
might just ignore my request. And I don't intend to manipulate people into
making them think I would sue them.
It's not my impression that there has been a lot of court cases involving
copyleft; most of the license violations seem to be handled without the need for
lawsuits, though I guess both lawyers and the threat of lawsuits are still quite
used. The FSF's [[https://www.fsf.org/licensing/compliance][Compliance Lab]] gives a good impression of the potential
difficulty of fixing license violations. I don't mind this compliance fixing,
but in principle I am a bit against spending time making evil people relicense
works when time could be spent making good people create new, free works. In
the long run, this will surely result in more good, free works, though forcing
someone evil to relicence might be practical in the short run.
In essence: Copyright is so hopelessly broken, and personally I'm not going to
fight copyright with itself. This is because I'm not going to depend its and
copyleft's legal benefits, and that is because I would only depend on something
broken if I found it /very/ necessary and not just useful in the short run. I
just want to share my works freely, and if someone who uses my works don't want
to do that, I'll simply ignore them. My walking away from copyleft makes my
works usable by more people.
#&img;url=/img/licenses/wtfpl.png,float=right
So, from now on I'll use the [[http://www.wtfpl.net/][Do What The Fuck You Want To Public License (WTFPL)]]
for all my original works, software and culture alike. I don't think that the
"fuck" in the license is a problem. I also thought about using Creative Commons
Zero, but even though [[http://wiki.creativecommons.org/CC0_FAQ][it can be used for software]], [[http://opensource.org/licenses/index.html][OSI has not approved it]]
because of [[http://projects.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review/2012-February/thread.html][a patent clause]] ([[https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#CC0][FSF has approved it]], and it's also DFSG-free), so it
might be unpractical. WTFPL has been approved by the FSF. [[http://opensource.org/minutes20090304][OSI rejected it]], but
that's because they didn't consider it a license and not because they disagreed
with any of the (1) clauses in the WTFPL, so I don't think using the WTFPL will
pose any practical problems. I'll still contribute to copyleft works, though I
might mention this URL.
I was a bit inspired by [[http://blog.ninapaley.com/2013/01/18/ahimsa-sita-sings-the-blues-now-cc-0-public-domain/][Nina Paley's change to CC 0 from CC BY-SA]]. I think her
story is scary.
My first copylefted program to be un-copylefted is the generator for this
website which used to be under the AGPL. I'll relicense the rest of my works on
a need-to-basis (there are so many, and I have other stuff to do).

View File

@ -1,10 +1,16 @@
#+title: My choices of software licenses
#+title: My choices of software licenses (outdated)
#&summary
Which licenses do I use, and why?
Which licenses did I use, and why?
#&
#+startup: showall
#+license: bysa
#&+classes=warning
This is an old opinion of mine, but its arguments still hold if one assumes that
copyleft is very important. See <@eval
macros.titlelink('/writings/non-copylefted')@> for my updated opinion.
#&
* My choices of software licenses
I like strong copyleft, the stuff found in the GNU General Public License, the