Timeline for With source code lost, can the binary be released as MIT?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 13, 2018 at 8:35 | vote | accept | Beamie | ||
| Apr 12, 2018 at 18:20 | comment | added | Beamie | It's mostly those last use cases (sofware preservation and legaly modifiable) I want to address, without having to hope that it is so called abandoware (which is not a legal term) or not. | |
| Apr 12, 2018 at 18:15 | comment | added | habs | Sure. Note that if the program is any more complex than a 'hello world', it would be a real detraction for developers to not have the source code. Many developers wouldn't want to edit something at all that could contain malware or other antifeatures. I guess it's technically a step up from a totally proprietary license, and it would help with projects like archive.org and computing history. But I can't really see something like this becoming maintained and being used practically. | |
| Apr 12, 2018 at 18:11 | comment | added | Beamie | Yes, I think MIT is the closest choice I got. I want it to be clear that the software can be dissassembled and build derivate works on, distrubute, or do as you otherwise wish, but still attribute the copyright owners. | |
| Apr 12, 2018 at 14:00 | history | edited | habs | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Added Floodgap
|
| Apr 12, 2018 at 0:04 | history | answered | habs | CC BY-SA 3.0 |