|
What should you call it? Expat, MIT, X11?
Started by Joe on
, 3 posts
by 3 people.
Answer Snippets (Read the full thread at stackoverflow):
The OSI calls it the MIT license http://www.opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.php
MIT seems to describe it best since it is the MIT license..
|
|
I found a great DAL and it is MIT licensed. Can I use this code without getting into trouble?
Answer Snippets (Read the full thread at stackoverflow):
MIT is one of the licenses that is more compatible with commercial licensing.
If you distribute the MIT code then you also need to ensure you distribute the license (thanks Neil probably can use it.
|
|
What is the difference between licensing a program under the MIT license (or the BSD one) and putting it in the public domain?
Started by cool-RR on
, 4 posts
by 4 people.
Answer Snippets (Read the full thread at stackoverflow):
The MIT license does place some requirements on the consumer of the code, such as
"The above.
|
Ask your Facebook Friends
|
I would like to make a program and licence it under MIT. However, I would like to use the GPLv3 PyQt library in it. Is this legal? PS. Is there any difference with GPLv2?
Started by Joe on
, 4 posts
by 4 people.
Answer Snippets (Read the full thread at stackoverflow):
In this case you....
However, you cannot override the more restrictive GPL license with your MIT license in the readme.
If they refuse of the source, it is legal.
It's legal if you contact the team and ask for an MIT licensed version of PyQt.
|
|
I often want to release small projects of mine for others to see/use/improve. I have used the GPL with a couple of my projects, but I would like to be more permissive than that--so I chose the MIT license.
My question is, how would I go about releasing...
Started by alecwh on
, 4 posts
by 4 people.
Answer Snippets (Read the full thread at stackoverflow):
(I haven't really looked into the MIT License)
There are a few options for you agreed in 1998 to use a modified MIT....
You might want to add after that some specifics like Attribution Required .
Under the (Link Goes Here) MIT License.
|
|
I would like to embed JQuery into an embedded device running a web server. Being an embedded device, storage is at a premium. Here is the comment header of JQuery:
/* * jQuery JavaScript Library v1.3.2 * http://jquery.com/ * * Copyright (c) 2009 John ...
Started by Robert on
, 7 posts
by 7 people.
Answer Snippets (Read the full thread at stackoverflow):
The MIT License:
The MIT License
Copyright (c)
Permission the MIT and BSD licenses is this:
You can do whatever you want with the code but you must tell people that you used MIT or ....
No, you don't need to embed the licence.
|
|
Hi,
I'd like to use some MIT-licensed xml-parsing code in my iPhone game. This seems to require that I package the MIT license with the application. However, my iPhone app does not include extensive documentation and my demographic will not want legal...
Started by brainfsck on
, 4 posts
by 4 people.
Answer Snippets (Read the full thread at stackoverflow):
Honestly....
By default, it's a boilerplate document, but you should be able to paste the MIT license into the bottom could also acknowledge the use of the MIT-licensed code on your web page for the application, with a link back to the source.
|
|
I would like to get ahold of a lightweight, portable fiber lib with MIT license (or looser). Boost.Coroutine does not qualify (not lightweight), neither do Portable Coroutine Library nor Kent C++CSP (both GPL).
Edit: could you help me find one? :)
Started by Jonas Byström on
, 3 posts
by 3 people.
Answer Snippets (Read the full thread at stackoverflow):
Libtask : MIT License Libconcurrency : LGPL (a little tighter than MIT, but it's a functional.
|
|
MIT/BSD licenses basically say: Hey, use the stuff, but don't claim it's yours.
CC-By license (without nc and the such, just the plain cc-by) says: Hey, use the stuff, but don't claim it's yours.
Now is there any substantial difference between these licenses...
Started by Boldewyn on
, 5 posts
by 5 people.
Answer Snippets (Read the full thread at stackoverflow):
Also MIT requires the license be as given by MIT in the source....
The MIT to contribute to the sum total of human knowledge and art that we all own.
I think that's the only difference.
CC licenses aren't meant to be used for software.
|
|
If I've got some code that I'd like to share and make open source.
I'm not a lawyer. What are the big differences between these choices?
LGPL - GNU Lesser General Public License MIT License Apache License
Started by tyndall on
, 4 posts
by 4 people.
Answer Snippets (Read the full thread at stackoverflow):
The MIT license is liberal and short, basically it just prevents you.
This might help you.
|
