Is it okay to re-license WTFPL works as ISC?
- sorcerykid
- Member
- Posts: 1847
- Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 15:36
- GitHub: sorcerykid
- In-game: Nemo
- Location: Illinois, USA
Is it okay to re-license WTFPL works as ISC?
If I use WTFPL licensed source code or media in a mod or game I'm developing, can I relicense it as ISC since the WTFPL is riddled with legal problems and doesn't even include a proper warranty disclaimer?
http://cubicspot.blogspot.com/2017/04/w ... opers.html
I know with some licenses, you have to maintain the exact terms and conditions in derivatives, but I'm not sure if that restriction applies in this case. The WTFPL license seems very liberal, but I figured I should double check just in case :)
http://cubicspot.blogspot.com/2017/04/w ... opers.html
I know with some licenses, you have to maintain the exact terms and conditions in derivatives, but I'm not sure if that restriction applies in this case. The WTFPL license seems very liberal, but I figured I should double check just in case :)
- Napiophelios
- Member
- Posts: 1035
- Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2014 01:14
- GitHub: Napiophelios
- IRC: Nappi
- In-game: Nappi
Re: Is it okay to re-license WTFPL works as ISC?
I think as long as you give proper credit to the original creators it's okay.
that is just good manners, probably still legal even if you didn't.
that is just good manners, probably still legal even if you didn't.
- sorcerykid
- Member
- Posts: 1847
- Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 15:36
- GitHub: sorcerykid
- In-game: Nemo
- Location: Illinois, USA
Re: Is it okay to re-license WTFPL works as ISC?
Yes, credit of course. That's (hopefully) always a given :) As a safeguard, I'm even going to mention that the content was re-licensed.
Thanks for the help!
Thanks for the help!
- Hume2
- Member
- Posts: 710
- Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2018 08:24
- GitHub: Hume2
- In-game: Hume2
- Location: Czech Republic
Re: Is it okay to re-license WTFPL works as ISC?
In my opinion, WTFPL says something like: I really don't care about copyright stuff and I am not blaming you if you do anything.
The WTFPL license says: "You just do what the fuck you want." So if you want to use another license, it's very OK.
The WTFPL license says: "You just do what the fuck you want." So if you want to use another license, it's very OK.
If you lack the reality, go on a trip or find a job.
- Wuzzy
- Member
- Posts: 4803
- Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2012 15:01
- GitHub: Wuzzy2
- IRC: Wuzzy
- In-game: Wuzzy
- Contact:
Re: Is it okay to re-license WTFPL works as ISC?
From the WTFPL FAQ:
Sam Hocevar wrote: Can I make money with my software using the WTFPL?
Yes.
By the way, with the WTFPL, can I also…
Oh but yes, of course you can.
But can I…
Yes you can.
Can…
Yes!
Sam Hocevar wrote:The WTFPL lets you relicense the work under any other license.
@sorcerykid:Sam Hocevar wrote:Why is there no “no warranty” clause?
The WTFPL is an all-purpose license and does not cover only computer programs; it can be used for artwork, documentation and so on. As such, it only covers copying, distribution and modification. If you want to add a no warranty clause for a program, you may use the following wording in your source code:
/* This program is free software. It comes without any warranty, to
* the extent permitted by applicable law. You can redistribute it
* and/or modify it under the terms of the Do What The Fuck You Want
* To Public License, Version 2, as published by Sam Hocevar. See
* http://www.wtfpl.net/ for more details. */
[citation needed]sorcerykid wrote:[…] the WTFPL is riddled with legal problems […]
- sorcerykid
- Member
- Posts: 1847
- Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 15:36
- GitHub: sorcerykid
- In-game: Nemo
- Location: Illinois, USA
Re: Is it okay to re-license WTFPL works as ISC?
Citation: The link in the OP.Wuzzy wrote:@sorcerykid:[citation needed]sorcerykid wrote:[…] the WTFPL is riddled with legal problems […]
- Wuzzy
- Member
- Posts: 4803
- Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2012 15:01
- GitHub: Wuzzy2
- IRC: Wuzzy
- In-game: Wuzzy
- Contact:
Re: Is it okay to re-license WTFPL works as ISC?
TIL U.S. law is just absurd.
- ShallowDweller
- Member
- Posts: 77
- Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2017 22:23
Re: Is it okay to re-license WTFPL works as ISC?
If I got the cubicspot's post right, the main problems with WTFPL are:
Lack of a warranty disclaimer;
The swearing;
Correct me if I'm wrong, but they can be solved using (IF they are allowed here) WTFNMFPL (if you don't mind the swearing), the Unlicense, Free Public License 1.0.0 or 0BSD.
But answering your question: yes, if the work is under WTFPL, then you can replace it with any license you want when you distribute.
Lack of a warranty disclaimer;
The swearing;
Correct me if I'm wrong, but they can be solved using (IF they are allowed here) WTFNMFPL (if you don't mind the swearing), the Unlicense, Free Public License 1.0.0 or 0BSD.
But answering your question: yes, if the work is under WTFPL, then you can replace it with any license you want when you distribute.
- sorcerykid
- Member
- Posts: 1847
- Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 15:36
- GitHub: sorcerykid
- In-game: Nemo
- Location: Illinois, USA
Re: Is it okay to re-license WTFPL works as ISC?
The main problems with the WTFPL are the verbage "do what the fuck you want to". Notwithstanding the swearing, those are meaningless legal terms and conditions. If anything, they are actually inviting a lawsuit against the software developer -- which is in full accordance with the license terms "do what the fuck you want to", which unequivocally includes suing the author for any spurious reason that one chooses.
Heck, someone might decide to use the software for illicit purposes. And guess who is going to be held civilly (and quite possibly criminally) liable when its discovered that the software's only disclaimer was "do what the fuck you want to?"
Heck, someone might decide to use the software for illicit purposes. And guess who is going to be held civilly (and quite possibly criminally) liable when its discovered that the software's only disclaimer was "do what the fuck you want to?"
- ShallowDweller
- Member
- Posts: 77
- Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2017 22:23
Re: Is it okay to re-license WTFPL works as ISC?
Good point. This is one of the reasons I chose CC0 over WTFPL:sorcerykid wrote:The main problems with the WTFPL are the verbage "do what the fuck you want to". Notwithstanding the swearing, those are meaningless legal terms and conditions. If anything, they are actually inviting a lawsuit against the software developer -- which is in full accordance with the license terms "do what the fuck you want to", which unequivocally includes suing the author for any spurious reason that one chooses.
Heck, someone might decide to use the software for illicit purposes. And guess who is going to be held civilly (and quite possibly criminally) liable when its discovered that the software's only disclaimer was "do what the fuck you want to?"
Unless expressly stated otherwise, the person who associated a work with this deed makes no warranties about the work, and disclaims liability for all uses of the work, to the fullest extent permitted by applicable law.
- Wuzzy
- Member
- Posts: 4803
- Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2012 15:01
- GitHub: Wuzzy2
- IRC: Wuzzy
- In-game: Wuzzy
- Contact:
Re: Is it okay to re-license WTFPL works as ISC?
I strongly discourage the use of extemely obscure licenses such as WTFNMFPL or DWYPL or other ad-hoc inventions that nobody ever heard of. People should stop inventing more and more crazy licenses that aren't even innovative.
At least the WTFPL is not obscure.
About the liability thing: Is this mainly an US thing? I mean, you can get sued for absolutely nothing? WTF? US law is broken.
But yeah, I guess this means that if you are an US citizen the WTFPL is indeed legal suicide. Although I have never heard of any real case involving the WTFPL so far.
It would be better if a real lawyer could say something about this.
So to summarize: As an licensee, the WTFPL is safe to use, and you can safely replace it with anything. Note it is a FSF-approved license, so it is definitely compatible with free software.
Only as a licensor, it might be dangerous (but this needs to be proven first), but the good news is you can change the license anytime you want.
I think the easiest solution is to simply switch to the MIT License (aka X11 license).
At least the WTFPL is not obscure.
About the liability thing: Is this mainly an US thing? I mean, you can get sued for absolutely nothing? WTF? US law is broken.
But yeah, I guess this means that if you are an US citizen the WTFPL is indeed legal suicide. Although I have never heard of any real case involving the WTFPL so far.
It would be better if a real lawyer could say something about this.
So to summarize: As an licensee, the WTFPL is safe to use, and you can safely replace it with anything. Note it is a FSF-approved license, so it is definitely compatible with free software.
Only as a licensor, it might be dangerous (but this needs to be proven first), but the good news is you can change the license anytime you want.
I think the easiest solution is to simply switch to the MIT License (aka X11 license).
- rubenwardy
- Moderator
- Posts: 6978
- Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 18:11
- GitHub: rubenwardy
- IRC: rubenwardy
- In-game: rubenwardy
- Location: Bristol, United Kingdom
- Contact:
Re: Is it okay to re-license WTFPL works as ISC?
FSF do not recommend it though, and OSI don't recognise it as an open source license
It's no different from dedication to the public domain. Author has submitted license approval request – author is free to make public domain dedication. Although he agrees with the recommendation, Mr. Michlmayr notes that public domain doesn't exist in Europe. Recommend: Reject.
- Wuzzy
- Member
- Posts: 4803
- Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2012 15:01
- GitHub: Wuzzy2
- IRC: Wuzzy
- In-game: Wuzzy
- Contact:
Re: Is it okay to re-license WTFPL works as ISC?
That the OSI doesn't officially recognize it as open source license is just stupid, they clearly disregard their own Open Source Definition as the 10 criteria are obviously all fulfilled. Note the WTFPL is neither explicitly rejected nor accepted. Also, just because the OSI did not approve a license does not automatically mean it is not open source. Just look at the Open Source Definition and it should be obvious. Nowhere does the definition state that the license must not imply “public domain”.
The FSF did the right thing, while accepting it as it technically qualifies while at the same time pointing out problems.
Besides, anyone can just replace the WTFPL (that's the point!). Relicensing is perfectly fine as discussed above.
Also, I think one should never reject something only because it is licensed WTFPL. That's just stupid, you only shoot yourselves in the foot.
The FSF did the right thing, while accepting it as it technically qualifies while at the same time pointing out problems.
Besides, anyone can just replace the WTFPL (that's the point!). Relicensing is perfectly fine as discussed above.
Also, I think one should never reject something only because it is licensed WTFPL. That's just stupid, you only shoot yourselves in the foot.
- ChimneySwift
- Member
- Posts: 320
- Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2017 06:46
- GitHub: ChimneySwift
- IRC: ChimneySwift
- In-game: ChimneySwift
- Location: 127.0.0.1
Re: Is it okay to re-license WTFPL works as ISC?
There are limited areas where rejecting using something that is licensed under WTFPL makes sense, the only reason for rejecting it I can think of is because you intend to use the software in a setting where swearing would not be appropriate (such as schools), and simply swapping out the license would not be possible.
But it's clear that the legal implications of using (or even contributing to a project that uses) such a license, even if they're only theoretical, makes it not worth defending or using IMO, there are plenty of licenses such as MIT and CC0 which provide similar levels of permissiveness while remaining language neutral and legally vetted. They honestly aren't that much more scary and complex either, CC0 even has a handy easy to read version...
But it's clear that the legal implications of using (or even contributing to a project that uses) such a license, even if they're only theoretical, makes it not worth defending or using IMO, there are plenty of licenses such as MIT and CC0 which provide similar levels of permissiveness while remaining language neutral and legally vetted. They honestly aren't that much more scary and complex either, CC0 even has a handy easy to read version...
A spoon is basically a tiny bowl with a stick on it
- sorcerykid
- Member
- Posts: 1847
- Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 15:36
- GitHub: sorcerykid
- In-game: Nemo
- Location: Illinois, USA
Re: Is it okay to re-license WTFPL works as ISC?
No, not sued for nothing. But liability can be incurred under both tort law and contract law, in countries with English-based legal systems. A software license agreement is, after all, a contract by which a copyright holder licenses the use of a software product to an end-user. Would you really want to place your signature on a legal instrument that is fully admissible in a courtroom that states "do whatever the fuck you want to"?!Wuzzy wrote: About the liability thing: Is this mainly an US thing? I mean, you can get sued for absolutely nothing? WTF? US law is broken.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/End-user_ ... _agreement
Moreover, tort law is an extremely vast and nebulous legal territory best reserved for experts in the field. This is why warranties and disclaimers, properly vetted by qualified attorneys, are so important as part of a software license agreement, because they can protect against potentially frivolous lawsuits, perhaps the most famous in recent U.S. history being the McDonald's coffee case
- Wuzzy
- Member
- Posts: 4803
- Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2012 15:01
- GitHub: Wuzzy2
- IRC: Wuzzy
- In-game: Wuzzy
- Contact:
Re: Is it okay to re-license WTFPL works as ISC?
Oh man! Did you even read the Wikipedia article? It's the oposite of a “frivolous lawsuit”. Seriously, read it. Everything you believe about the coffee case is wrong.because they can protect against potentially frivolous lawsuits, perhaps the most famous in recent U.S. history being the McDonald's coffee case
Anyway, this topic has gone too off-topic too far for now. The original questions have been answered long ago. Signing off.
- sorcerykid
- Member
- Posts: 1847
- Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 15:36
- GitHub: sorcerykid
- In-game: Nemo
- Location: Illinois, USA
Re: Is it okay to re-license WTFPL works as ISC?
I never said the case was frivolous, I said it was "potentially frivolous" only because it was the most famous example of civil litigation that could go wrong if misused or abused. Please do not put words into my mouth.
The point of the post is that WTFPL is an inferior software license that offers no legal protections for developers whatsoever, and due diligence is to properly relicense such works with vetted legal terms and conditions.
The point of the post is that WTFPL is an inferior software license that offers no legal protections for developers whatsoever, and due diligence is to properly relicense such works with vetted legal terms and conditions.
- ShallowDweller
- Member
- Posts: 77
- Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2017 22:23
Re: Is it okay to re-license WTFPL works as ISC?
Wuzzy wrote:I think the easiest solution is to simply switch to the MIT License (aka X11 license).
The thing I don't like about the MIT license is the fact that it is not clear how much code is considered a "substantial portion" and I can't seem to find an answer for that. Assuming this is the oficial license site and the full text, there doesn't seem to be a clear definition at all. I also can't seem to find rules for crediting the author of a code under the MIT license or if the usage of parts of their code means I must use the same license.ChimneySwift wrote:But it's clear that the legal implications of using (or even contributing to a project that uses) such a license, even if they're only theoretical, makes it not worth defending or using IMO, there are plenty of licenses such as MIT and CC0 which provide similar levels of permissiveness while remaining language neutral and legally vetted. They honestly aren't that much more scary and complex either, CC0 even has a handy easy to read version...
For example:
If I use a few bits of code from magic beans (WTFPL), I can simply add a few notes in the forum post/lua files/read me/etc saying something like "I would like to thank Wuzzy for leaving some mods under WTFPL so I could use bits of code as a reference". And use any license I want without asking any questions.
HOWEVER,
If I use arround 50 lines from Player effects's code (MIT), how should I proceed with the license? Is that considered a substantial portion of the software? Will I have to use the MIT license in my mod too? Will I be allowed to use a less restrictive license (such as WTFPL or CC0)? Is there a specific format I must use in order to credit Wuzzy for the bits of code from that mod or do I just need to leave it clear that I used bits of code from Player effects by Wuzzy? And if someone reworks my mod while keeping that bit of MIT code, how should they proceed with the license?
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests