[License-discuss] A simple, no-requirements license.

[Buck Golemon]

There's a gap that CC0 and the Unlicense have attempted to fill, which is
still not covered by any OSI approved license.
Are any of you willing (and able) to attempt to fill this gap?

I believe the first step would be to agree on a (short!) list of minimum
requirements.

My own requirements:
 1) The license should be understandable by myself and my fellow engineers.
 * This requires brevity.
 * The license should have the absolute minimum of compatibility issues
with other OSI licenses.
 *  * The licensee would ideally have no requirements placed on them by the
license.
 * Assure both the licensee and licencor against litigation by the other
(to the extent possible, of course).




I'm trying to follow up on the suggested course of action in these posts:
 *
http://projects.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review/2012-February/000243.html
 *
http://projects.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review/2012-January/000047.html
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20140422/62d8b1d5/attachment.html>