Add to Chrome
Add to Edge
Add to Firefox
Add to Opera
Add to Brave
Add to Safari
Join our community
Top Con
•••
DazzlingShaushka's Experience
ExcitedHorkos's Experience
Top Pro
•••
Top Pro
•••
Top Pro
•••
The MIT/Expat license doesn't protect against open-source code being taken (without payment) and used in proprietary software. This is harmful to user freedom because it lets future development be taken out of the public domain and instead moved into non-free programs. In addition, it doesn't protect against software patents being used to attack user freedom. Unlike the Apache 2.0 and GPLv3 licenses, the MIT/Expat was written before software patents became a problem and doesn't include a patent release. See More
Love the copyleft functionality. My software will be open, and always open. See More
The free-est of licenses. Allows anyone to do anything to/with it. See More
Simple, negativates intellectual property, doesn`t falsely legitimate government coercive threats against other humans not mattering what they have done with their code. You can be sure that using it you avoid "my property, it's mine, ok? I just left it for you to use under my conditions, I own it, I wrote it in that file, it makes sense, my government also says so, now die or I'll kill you." See More
When using public code hosts such as GitHub and BitBucket it is suggested to use the filename UNLICENSE instead of the more traditional LICENSE or COPYRIGHT to store the license so it's easier to find unlicensed code. Additionally, the first line of the license is worded in a unique way specifically to allow searching for it with search engines. See More
It requires change of files, so if you are making a copy of any software licensed with this license, you will have to PROVE that it is not the original software under another name. You are permitted to use the Standard Version and create and use Modified Versions for any purpose without restriction, provided that you do not Distribute the Modified Version. See More