undefined | Better HN

0 pointsrhodey8mo ago0 comments

What the license allows for is very clear

I publish many things without dual licensing and yet your kind will not be satisfied

0 comments

This isn't about demanding you let companies use your code. This is about what you are calling that license. It is not the MIT license and it is wrong to lie to people by calling it the MIT license. You should give it a name like "The bizcards license" or whatever.

IANAL but you also might want to consult a lawyer since your franken-license contradicts itself. It might be hard to challenge a company in court when they steal your code.

cAtte_8mo ago

if it forbids commercial use, it's not MIT. like at all

rhodeyOP8mo ago

This is simple I wrote a license The license says there are two licenses If you are non-commercial you get MIT If you are commercial you email for terms

There is nowhere a claim that this is MIT

ahazred8ta8mo ago

Your lawyer will explain to you that what you wanted, and what your license terms actually mean, are two different things. There are noncommercial users who have downloaded your software and are using it under the terms of the MIT license. You already gave them permission. Now, they can give copies to commercial users, who can use it under the terms of the MIT license. Your lawyer will explain this to you.

rhodeyOP8mo ago

> The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software

1 more reply

Retr0id8mo ago

You can create any custom license terms you like, as you have done, but if you refer to it as the "MIT License" (which you do, explicitly) without the source being available under the MIT license, you invite only confusion.

rhodeyOP8mo ago

If I published using any non-commercial license whatsoever there would be disagreements so here we are all the same

1 more reply

xorcist8mo ago

So being non-commercial I can just fork and redistribute the software under MIT license? Strange, but acceptable.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

craftkiller8mo ago

IANAL but you also might want to consult a lawyer since your franken-license contradicts itself. It might be hard to challenge a company in court when they steal your code.

cAtte_8mo ago

if it forbids commercial use, it's not MIT. like at all

rhodeyOP8mo ago

This is simple I wrote a license The license says there are two licenses If you are non-commercial you get MIT If you are commercial you email for terms

There is nowhere a claim that this is MIT

ahazred8ta8mo ago

rhodeyOP8mo ago

> The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software

1 more reply

Retr0id8mo ago

rhodeyOP8mo ago

If I published using any non-commercial license whatsoever there would be disagreements so here we are all the same

1 more reply

xorcist8mo ago

So being non-commercial I can just fork and redistribute the software under MIT license? Strange, but acceptable.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse