Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on May 27, 2024. It is now read-only.

REUSE FAQ language reworked #72

Open
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Conversation

comradekingu
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

copyright and license tag.

If you really want to exclude a file, consider using the
[CC0](https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) license for this
file. By doing this, you put the file in the public domain, or your country's
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Or you do nothing of the sort, which is why this is bad advice.
Much less do you do anything to help yourself and your newfound assumptions if you want to have other contributors from other jurisdictions.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for the wording improvements! However, I'd suggest to not change this content bit, but concentrate on wording/typos in this PR.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@comradekingu comradekingu Feb 6, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@mxmehl That part is no less a mistake. Licensing something CC0 doesn't put it into the public domain. Much less in any sense compatible with taking contributions globally. This is because some countries don't have this provision.
"CC licensing" is furthermore a scourge meaningless in terms of reuse, because it doesn't necessitate anything meaningful seeing as "NC" is also part of it.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@comradekingu comradekingu Feb 6, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It doesn't do anything productive. What it does do is proliferate the amount of licenses (and concepts) to take into account, where this one in particular adds nothing over its already mentioned alternatives. I would argue it opens up a whole new FAQ:

to the fullest extent permitted by law.

The outcome isn't "complex". You have to adhere to a copyright system and its protections to license your way out of it, and that doesn't work. Reason why is some jurisdictions require commission, some don't allow relinquishing copyright that way, and some allow changing ones will (or ones next of kin to do so). Some tack on extra requirements to avoid slander by default, etc. It doesn't reliable remove one person from the equation, much less function any differently between many.

There is no global (or near gloabl as the case with copyright) of relying on common public domain, so there is no hack to be had by leaning on copyright to get there.

TL;DR "we believe it provides the best and most complete alternative for contributing a work to the public domain" isn't "If you really want to exclude a file" because no additional benefit is to be had here.

Through no fault of the license is that the case, but CC remains an incompatible mess at large.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We already have at least one issue suggestion to re-word this. Please let's discuss this over there.

faq.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants