> You must ensure that everyone who gets a copy of any part of this software from you, with or without changes, also gets the text of this license or a link to https://blueoakcouncil.org/license/1.0.0.
To me this sounds like a viral public domain, so in a sense less permissive than MIT & co. If I modify the work but still have to put the text of this license when publishing it, the modified/derivative will be licensed under this license as well. Is this a fair assessment or am I missing something? I don't see how someone could take the work and use it in a proprietary software for example.
> If I modify the work but still have to put the text of this license when publishing it, the modified/derivative will be licensed under this license as well.
How does that follow? Compare:
MIT:
> The above copyright notice and this permission notice (including the next paragraph) shall be included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software.
BSD:
> 1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.
>
> 2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution.
I'm not sure the reason for bringing up that clause, when the same clause exists in the MIT license:
"Permission is hereby granted [to do so-and-so] subject to the following conditions:
The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software."
If you're shipping MIT-licensed software (or anything derived from MIT-licensed software) without also shipping a copy of the license, then you're not in compliance with the license.
> You must ensure that everyone who gets a copy of any part of this software from you, with or without changes, also gets the text of this license or a link to https://blueoakcouncil.org/license/1.0.0.
To me this sounds like a viral public domain, so in a sense less permissive than MIT & co. If I modify the work but still have to put the text of this license when publishing it, the modified/derivative will be licensed under this license as well. Is this a fair assessment or am I missing something? I don't see how someone could take the work and use it in a proprietary software for example.