Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

No license found #323

Open
JacksonChen666 opened this issue Mar 3, 2023 · 8 comments
Open

No license found #323

JacksonChen666 opened this issue Mar 3, 2023 · 8 comments
Assignees
Labels
enhancement Ideas for improvements

Comments

@JacksonChen666
Copy link

This project does not seem to have a license declared in an obvious way, or at all. A license should be added (as this project seems to be intended as open source) so that users can run, modify, study, distribute, and use the code.

https://choosealicense.com/no-permission/

@jorgesumle
Copy link
Contributor

Unfortunately it's proprietary: "Copyright © 2023 Mastodon gGmbH".

It would be nice if someone created a free version.

@bovergaauw
Copy link

Unfortunately it's proprietary: "Copyright © 2023 Mastodon gGmbH".

Please be careful, a copyright notice does not make a work proprietary: The latest GPL starts with:

"GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE
Version 3, 29 June 2007
Copyright © 2007 Free Software Foundation, Inc. https://fsf.org/".

It's the license's terms that determine whether a work can be considered proprietary, open source or other.

@andypiper
Copy link
Member

The Mastodon apps and server source code are GPL and AGPL v3 (see their separate repositories).

I am relatively new on the team, but I will look into getting a LICENSE added to the website source so that folks feel more confident in how their contributions are used. Thank you.

@andypiper andypiper self-assigned this Jul 13, 2023
@andypiper andypiper added the enhancement Ideas for improvements label Jul 13, 2023
@shuvashish76
Copy link

shuvashish76 commented Oct 19, 2023

Any updates?
(Duplicate #24)

@andypiper
Copy link
Member

We determined that there was no urgent need to add a license to the joinmastodon website source as we do not expect it to be reused elsewhere. Again, the actual application code for the Mastodon server / web UI, and Android and iOS apps, is already licensed under OSI-approved licenses.

@shuvashish76
Copy link

As @TheLastProject mentioned no license means "proprietary" by default.
See Anti-Feature of Mastodon for F-Droid.

AF_mastodon

Without going through the long discussion here is the short reason.

@bovergaauw
Copy link

bovergaauw commented Oct 20, 2023

No license means "proprietary" by default, but the lack of a license document bundled with a piece of software does not mean there is no license defined for it elsewhere.

Edit: More precisely, no license terms means "proprietary" by default, but the lack of license terms bundled directly with a piece of software does not mean there are no license terms defined for it elsewhere.

@demode-root
Copy link

We determined that there was no urgent need to add a license to the joinmastodon website source as we do not expect it to be reused elsewhere.

There is no urgent need from a purely consumer side, but from a contributor and translator side it is quite important. I would also assume that for a project building social web FOSS licenses would be a priority number one.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement Ideas for improvements
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

6 participants