48 lines
1.7 KiB
Plaintext
48 lines
1.7 KiB
Plaintext
TLDR;
|
|
=====================================================
|
|
Nirvana License, i.e. Beings needs no license
|
|
=====================================================
|
|
|
|
Preamble
|
|
------------
|
|
GNU, MIT, APACHE, Opensource, Source available -
|
|
So many options, why a new one?
|
|
To add / remove confusion may be, or
|
|
Just to remind Humans, you have evolved to as
|
|
being, you don't need one. Having license is like
|
|
having limitation, boundation not freedom, You
|
|
can have a Driving license and drive irresponsibly,
|
|
license provider / authority can impose some
|
|
nonsense rules. No matter how hard we try, Beings
|
|
don't like to be bound, limited...
|
|
They want freedom... little more - Nirvana.
|
|
-----------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
Experience
|
|
------------
|
|
Best of the best GPL(copyleft) and it's derivatives
|
|
are confusing which one to choose, but i get the idea
|
|
of 4 freedoms. + its protected by copyright laws.
|
|
Developers don't want to deal with lawyers (seems
|
|
wasting years), we want to build something.
|
|
I have seen license violation a lot, as they have
|
|
a fleet of lawyers.
|
|
I have seen Open Source is being used a suppressor
|
|
to GNU,GPL -Freedom centric ones. Going against the
|
|
ideology of creator of the open source definition
|
|
Bruce Perens, Eric S. Raymond,
|
|
-----------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quote
|
|
--------
|
|
Every rule / law has an exception except this.
|
|
Beings do not need a license, enough to have sense.
|
|
- Suvankar Sarkar (AKA Kar)
|
|
-----------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
=====================================================
|
|
Mentioned some examples good to bad, there may be
|
|
some reason to use any existing license.
|
|
you are free to choose this one, defined below.
|
|
..................................................... |