[computer-go] Collaboration project. Once again

[Don Dailey]

On Mon, 2006-08-07 at 11:48 +0100, Joss Wright wrote:
> 
> I've been following this for a while, and it has occurred to me in
> other
> projects: does it really have to be released under a license? If you
> really don't have anything specific that needs to be in the license
> (which is what most people's use of things like the BSD or even GPL
> license is for) then just don't use one. There is quite an obsession
> with licenses, and I do question what hideous consequences there would
> be to just putting software up without attaching a license. 

I'm not a legal expert, but it seems reasonable from a legal standpoint
that in the case of litigation concerning the software,  it would be FAR
better to have a clear statement of your expectations regarding it than
to have nothing at all.  

If there is not a clear statement of ownership (or that it's been
donated to the world),  doesn't that make it more vulnerable to other
claims of ownership, perhaps with some minor changes to the code?

How would you refute this when you never made any claims to the contrary
except after the fact?

Again, I'm no expert but someone could claim this by stamping their own
license on it.    In a court of law,  which claim would stand up?   A
piece of software with a clear statement of ownership or one with no
statement at all?    



- Don