[License-discuss] Pars pro toto: a fundamental(?) lack in (MIT licensed) (jquery) java-script packages?

[John Sullivan]

"Reincke, Karsten" <k.reincke at telekom.de> writes:

> Therefore, we want to ask: 
>
> Are we right? Do we really have to add the MIT license to an MIT
> licensed package which does not contain this license? Or is there any
> way to distribute the library to our 3rd. parties in exact that form
> we received from jquery?
>

We have a couple of ways of conveying license info for JavaScript that
we hope people will adopt -- they are both machine and human readable --
at <http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/javascript-trap.html>. The method
described at <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/javascript-labels.html> is
probably most suitable for cases like jquery.

License notices are important for the people receiving the software --
so that users who get the software know they have certain freedoms. It
may help to think about it in these terms as well as just satisfying
copyright holder requirements/expectations.

-john

-- 
John Sullivan | Executive Director, Free Software Foundation
GPG Key: 61A0963B | http://status.fsf.org/johns | http://fsf.org/blogs/RSS

Do you use free software? Donate to join the FSF and support freedom at
<http://www.fsf.org/register_form?referrer=8096>.