Closed brolund closed 11 years ago
"Authors who use or are planning to use the Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 license should consider a similar Free Software license such as the GNU General Public License [GPL]." http://www.dwheeler.com/essays/gpl-compatible.html
Since it’s a web app, it should be AGPL v3+. This closes a loophole with the GPL where running the software on a server would not make you need to release the source.
Ok, we'll go for AGPLv3. Then we can always relax it to GPLv3 if needed. :-)
By the way, the AGPL is not a license in terms of »By using the site, you accept the license« (like a EULA), but rather a copyright relaxation document, relevant mainly for developers. I’ll change the footer anyway with donation stuff and the rest of the links. :)
So, creative commons seem to be unfit for software. :-P http://wiki.creativecommons.org/FFAQ#Can_I_apply_a_Creative_Commons_license_to_software.3F
I think GPLv3. http://opensource.org/licenses/GPL-3.0
Takes on that before I change?
Quote from Neo4Js license manual:
"GNU Public License (GPL) The GNU Public License Version 3 (GPLv3) 3 is the common license of the Free Software Foundation4 , crafted to protect the following four freedoms: