undefined | Better HN

0 pointsrglover11mo ago0 comments

This is why I wrote the SAUCR license [1] for my full-stack JavaScript framework.

A lot of OSS developers get "got" by the ideological arguments of OSS and shy away from doing "source available" (which if we set down the Kool-Aid, is in effect open source because...the source is open).

If you're an independent or small team and want to protect your IP as best you can while keeping source available for learning/auditing, check it out.

[1] https://saucr.org

0 comments

ramses011mo ago

That's not a license, it's wishful thinking in template form.

The fact that you have "fill in the blanks here" in a "legal" document makes this actively harmful.

I respect the sentiment, but it's entirely the wrong direction. Better looking at the Creative Commons license picker/builder as a better example of a starting point.

rgloverOP11mo ago

> The fact that you have "fill in the blanks here" in a "legal" document makes this actively harmful.

It doesn't. At the end of the day, all legal documents are just words on a page. When in doubt, you can hire a lawyer or paralegal to review what you've written to ensure it's sound.

This is why people keep getting burned. They make foolish excuses, use the wrong licenses, and then they're surprised when a big fish swallows them whole.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse