[aur-general] AUR & Copyright
magnus at therning.org
Sun Feb 6 16:44:42 EST 2011
On 06/02/11 21:41, Gaetan Bisson wrote:
> [2011-02-06 19:28:38 -0200] Bernardo Barros:
>> 2011/2/6 Gaetan Bisson <bisson at archlinux.org>:
>>> "By uploading content to the Arch User Repository, you irrevocably
>>> agree to release it in the public domain, to the extent permitted
>>> by law."
>> GPL would do no harm to Arch either. And pieces of code with less
>> then 10 lines can't have any copyright. The difference in practice
>> is minimal, since it is very unlikely that this piece of code would
>> integrate a non-free software, even including big patches and
>> tricky things.
> Since there is little difference, why choose a complicated license
> such as the GPL over the (much simpler) public domain?
IANAL, but probably because the concept of an author releasing
something to "public domain" doesn't exist in all jurisdictions.
So it's arguably safer to pick a license, but I agree that the GPL
might be too complicated, why not use BSD?
Magnus Therning OpenPGP: 0xAB4DFBA4
email: magnus at therning.org jabber: magnus at therning.org
twitter: magthe http://therning.org/magnus
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 262 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
More information about the aur-general