Why isn't MIT license considered copyleft?

Dag-Erling Smørgrav des at des.no
Wed Apr 21 13:09:30 UTC 2010


opensource.*.nwo at neverbox.com writes:
> Why is MIT license considered non Copyleft (for example, by
> Wikipedia), if it dictates the license must be kept in every
> redistrubution?

Because it does not require redistribution of the source code.

DES
-- 
Dag-Erling Smørgrav - des at des.no



More information about the License-discuss mailing list