Appropriate licenses for web libraries

[David Woolley]

Pimm Hogeling wrote:
> Hello all,
> 
> we're currently looking for a new license for some libraries. Here is 
> the situation:
> 
> We use a language called haXe. The official compiler can compile the 
> haXe code to different targets including SWF files (binaries that run in 

Given how intellectual property oriented Adobe is, I find it difficult 
to believe that there is not a mechanism to embed copyright meta-data in 
SWF.

> Flash Player), JavaScript files (which are both binaries and source 
> files) and CPP/C++ files (which are obviously source files). The 

Javascript (did you mean ECMAScript?) has no compiled form.

> compiler comes bundled with some core libraries, which (at least 
> 
> The community has decided that it wants to relicense the libraries under 
> a license that does not obligate a licensee to accompany binaries by the 
> license, a copyright notice or a disclaimer. Is that possible? Is there 
> a license that does this?

Without a copyright notice, the libertarian users will assume it is 
public domain and the more cautious won't touch it.  Without a licence, 
it may be unsafe to use in Europe, as far as anyone who is afraid of 
being sued is concerned (there is no default right to execute a 
program).  Without a warranty restriction, you are vulnerable to demands 
for fixes and consequential loss.

-- 
David Woolley
Emails are not formal business letters, whatever businesses may want.
RFC1855 says there should be an address here, but, in a world of spam,
that is no longer good advice, as archive address hiding may not work.