NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.
All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report
:-)
--Larry Wall in <1991May31.181659.28817@jpl-devvax.jpl.nasa.gov>
Stories, comments, journals, and other submissions on use Perl; are Copyright 1998-2006, their respective owners.
Not so fast my friend... (Score:1)
While I endorse its spirit, I'm afraid it suffers from the failings of many other such licenses, namely, lack of indemnification.
If you've ever been through the process of getting business - esp. E&O - insurance, you'll understand that indemnification is pretty important. Which is why some licenses have been updated recently (e.g., Apache 2.0) to indeminify. Sure, it won't stop you from getting sued, but it makes harder for the plaintiff to get very far unless they can prove malici
Re:Not so fast my friend… (Score:1)
I agree, but the AFL falls short on a count at which the WFTPL is unbeatable: brevity and simplicity.
Personally, my ideal licence (for works I am not significantly invested in; GPL otherwise) would state the following:
This is very close to the MIT licence, except there is no copyright notice obligation. You may just not claim you wrote it.
Re:Not so fast my friend… (Score:2)
Reply to This
Parent