commit 9e4cc0e2854f196354353a799bbd6d5cc509ed8c
parent 223c1a9517982057d4395fc06d5a016655aef5e7
Author: Chris Bracken <chris@bracken.jp>
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2022 11:49:34 -0700
Publish site
Diffstat:
1 file changed, 56 insertions(+), 62 deletions(-)
diff --git a/2020/05/thoughts-on-licences/index.html b/2020/05/thoughts-on-licences/index.html
@@ -34,40 +34,37 @@
<article>
<h2 class="post-title"><a href="https://chris.bracken.jp/2020/05/thoughts-on-licences/">Thoughts on Licences</a></h2>
22 May 2020
-<p>I don’t pretend to think that the things I create have a whole ton of
-value, but I do think it’s important to carefully consider the terms
-under which they’re shared to ensure they’re consistent with my values.
-Despite my general dislike for all things legalistic, the most
-unambiguous way to state those terms is through a licence. So a couple
-days ago, I tossed LICENSE files into any of my public <a href="/code">repos</a>
-that didn’t already have one.</p>
-<p>So how did I settle on which licences to apply? Jump on into the
-DeLorean and let’s set the dial back to the late 1980s.</p>
-<p>It’s 1986 and I’ve got a 1200 baud modem wired up to a beat-up 286 with
-a steel case that would easily allow it to double as a boat anchor if
-needed. Armed with a dot-matrix printout of local BBSes with names like
-Camelot, Tommy’s Holiday Camp, and Forbidden Night Castle, I fire up
-PC-Talk. A series of <a href="https://www.windytan.com/2012/11/the-sound-of-dialup-pictured.html">high-pitched squeals and tones</a>
-fill the air, then text flashes across the screen. I’m online.</p>
-<p>BBSes were a treasure trove of information, filled to the brim with zip
-archives full of downloadable programs, source code, patches for
-existing programs, and all manner of text files with names like
-<a href="https://insecure.org/stf/smashstack.html">Smashing The Stack For Fun And Profit</a>. You could find
-everything from how to crack copy-protected software, to details on
-phone phreaking, to how to make nitroglycerine from commonly-available
-household items. It was through BBSes that I first downloaded an I’m
-sure <em>totally legitimate</em> copy of Borland Turbo C++ and took my first
+<p>Software licences are probably the single most boring aspect of software
+development, but I it’s important to carefully consider the terms under which
+the stuff I hack on is shared to ensure they’re consistent with my values.
+Despite my general dislike for all things legalistic, the most unambiguous way
+to state those terms is through a licence. So a couple days ago, I tossed
+LICENSE files into any of my public <a href="/code">repos</a> that didn’t already have one.</p>
+<p>So how did I settle on which licences to apply? Jump on into the DeLorean and
+let’s set the dial back to the late 1980s.</p>
+<p>It’s 1986 and I’ve got a 1200 baud modem wired up to a beat-up 286 with a steel
+case that would easily allow it to double as a boat anchor if needed. Armed
+with a dot-matrix printout of local BBSes with names like Camelot, Tommy’s
+Holiday Camp, and Forbidden Night Castle, I fire up PC-Talk. A series of
+<a href="https://www.windytan.com/2012/11/the-sound-of-dialup-pictured.html">high-pitched squeals and tones</a> fill the air, then text
+flashes across the screen. I’m online.</p>
+<p>BBSes were a treasure trove of information, filled to the brim with zip archives
+full of downloadable programs, source code, patches for existing programs, and
+all manner of text files with names like <a href="https://insecure.org/stf/smashstack.html">Smashing The Stack For Fun And
+Profit</a>. You could find everything from how to crack copy-protected
+software, to details on phone phreaking, to how to make nitroglycerine from
+commonly-available household items. It was through BBSes that I first downloaded
+an I’m sure <em>totally legitimate</em> copy of Borland Turbo C++ and took my first
baby steps writing <em>real</em> programs. No more BASIC for me.</p>
-<p>This culture of open sharing in the online world has had a huge impact
-on me. From those early experiences with BBSes to my first forays onto
-the Internet a few years later, seeing people openly sharing code and
-patches and helping each other solve problems over Usenet seemed almost
-revolutionary to me at the time. In some ways, it still does. I feel
-lucky to have been a part of it from such an early age.</p>
-<p>The end result is that I try to publicly share all the work I do. So
-when it came time to chuck licences on stuff, I sat down to work out a
-personals ad for my ideal licence. Aside from enjoying long walks on the
-beach, it should:</p>
+<p>This culture of open sharing in the online world has had a huge impact on me.
+From those early experiences with BBSes to my first forays onto the Internet a
+few years later, seeing people openly sharing code and patches and helping each
+other solve problems over Usenet seemed almost revolutionary to me at the time.
+In some ways, it still does. I feel lucky to have been a part of it from such an
+early age.</p>
+<p>The end result is that I try to publicly share all the work I do. So when it
+came time to chuck licences on stuff, I sat down to work out a personals ad for
+my ideal licence. Aside from enjoying long walks on the beach, it should:</p>
<ol>
<li>Allow free use, modification, and distribution both of the original
work and any derived works.</li>
@@ -79,35 +76,32 @@ or whoever produces them.</li>
information and techniques.</li>
<li>Be short, clear, and easy to understand.</li>
</ol>
-<p>On the software side, there were lots of options, but the best matches
-in my mind are the <a href="https://opensource.org/licenses/MIT">MIT</a> or <a href="https://opensource.org/licenses/BSD-3-Clause">BSD</a> licences.
-The 3-clause ’new’ BSD licence has an advantage in that it required
-written permission from the author to use their name in any
-endorsement/promotion of a derived work. That happens to be what we
-already use for <a href="https://github.com/flutter/flutter">work</a>.</p>
-<p>On the content side, I’ve always posted my web site’s content under a
-<a href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike</a> licence. But I don’t
-believe that’s actually the ideal match based on my priorities. Why is
-it that I’ve elected to use a licence that requires that derived works
-also be licensed under the same terms rather than under whatever terms
-someone feels like, so long as credit is given? In the end I settled on
-the more permissive <a href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">Creative Commons Attribution</a> licence.</p>
-<p>This feels to me a bit like the difference between <a href="https://opensource.org/licenses/BSD-3-Clause">BSD</a>
-and <a href="https://opensource.org/licenses/GPL-3.0">GPL</a> terms, where the latter requires that derived
-works also be GPL-licensed. This “viral” nature has always rubbed me the
-wrong way: rather than gently promoting a culture of sharing by example,
-it legally <em>requires</em> sharing under the same terms whether or not you
-want to.</p>
-<p>Personally, I’d like for people to do the right thing and share their
-work for everyone’s benefit not because they <em>have</em> to, but because they
-<em>want</em> to. If they don’t want to, why should my reaction be to disallow
-their use of my work? Isn’t that contrary to my stated goals of sharing
-as much and as broadly as possible?</p>
-<p>While I <em>hope</em> that more people share more of their work, it doesn’t
-bother me if you don’t. If anything I’ve written is somehow useful to
-you, I’m glad. Use your knowledge to help others and make the world a
-better place, and if you can find time to do so, share a bit with the
-rest of us.</p>
+<p>On the software side, there were lots of options, but the best matches in my
+mind are the <a href="https://opensource.org/licenses/MIT">MIT</a> or <a href="https://opensource.org/licenses/BSD-3-Clause">BSD</a> licences. The 3-clause
+’new’ BSD licence has an advantage in that it required written permission from
+the author to use their name in any endorsement/promotion of a derived work.
+That happens to be what we already use for <a href="https://github.com/flutter/flutter">work</a>.</p>
+<p>On the content side, I’ve always posted my web site’s content under a <a href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">Creative
+Commons Attribution-ShareAlike</a> licence. But I don’t believe that’s
+actually the ideal match based on my priorities. Why is it that I’ve elected to
+use a licence that requires that derived works also be licensed under the same
+terms rather than under whatever terms someone feels like, so long as credit is
+given? In the end I settled on the more permissive <a href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">Creative Commons
+Attribution</a> licence.</p>
+<p>This feels to me a bit like the difference between <a href="https://opensource.org/licenses/BSD-3-Clause">BSD</a> and
+<a href="https://opensource.org/licenses/GPL-3.0">GPL</a> terms, where the latter requires that derived works also be
+GPL-licensed. This “viral” nature has always rubbed me the wrong way: rather
+than gently promoting a culture of sharing by example, it legally <em>requires</em>
+sharing under the same terms whether or not you want to.</p>
+<p>Personally, I’d like for people to do the right thing and share their work for
+everyone’s benefit not because they <em>have</em> to, but because they <em>want</em> to. If
+they don’t want to, why should my reaction be to disallow their use of my work?
+Isn’t that contrary to my stated goals of sharing as much and as broadly as
+possible?</p>
+<p>While I <em>hope</em> that more people share more of their work, it doesn’t bother me
+if you don’t. If anything I’ve written is somehow useful to you, I’m glad. Use
+your knowledge to help others and make the world a better place, and if you can
+find time to do so, share a bit with the rest of us.</p>
<p>Got thoughts and opinions on licences? Fire an email my way at
<a href="mailto:chris@bracken.jp">chris@bracken.jp</a>.</p>
</article>
