utilizing Fair License, the shortest open-source license

[Winfield Hill]

James William Pye has composed a very short open-source
license, which he calls Fair License.
http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:mss:7623:200401:hhkgifnkgiiejnigaakm

---LICENSE---
<Copyright Information>

Utilization of the works is permitted provided that this
instrument is retained with the works, so that any entity
that utilizes the works is notified of this instrument.

DISCLAIMER: THE WORKS ARE WITHOUT WARRANTY.

---LICENSE---
---------------------------------------------------------

Pye says, "The copyright and other identification information
should be prepended to the license, which should be considered
part of the instrument."

Fair License is being evaluated by the OSI board's license
approval committee, whose chair, Russell Nelson, wrote:

"This must surely be the shortest open source license ever!
Still, we should send it back to the author because he uses
the hated word "utilize". Don't use utilize! Utilize "use"
instead. Means the same thing and avoids a phony formality."

According to rhid.com/fair, Pye changed the main body of his
Fair License,

Use of the works is permitted provided that this instrument
is retained with the works, so that any entity that uses the
works is notified of this instrument.

Hmm, is the last phrase in the body necessary? How about,

Use of the works is permitted provided that this instrument
is retained with the works.

The disclaimer phrase could be shortened as well, and eased:

Use of the works is permitted provided that this instrument
is retained with the works, which are offered without warranty.

Thanks,
- Win

whill_at_picovolt-dot-com

 

[Ian Stirling]

James William Pye has composed a very short open-source
license, which he calls Fair License.
http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:mss:7623:200401:hhkgifnkgiiejnigaakm

---LICENSE---
<Copyright Information>

Utilization of the works is permitted provided that this
instrument is retained with the works, so that any entity
that utilizes the works is notified of this instrument.

DISCLAIMER: THE WORKS ARE WITHOUT WARRANTY.

---LICENSE---

According to rhid.com/fair, Pye changed the main body of his
Fair License,

Use of the works is permitted provided that this instrument
is retained with the works, so that any entity that uses the
works is notified of this instrument.

Hmm, is the last phrase in the body necessary? How about,

Use of the works is permitted provided that this instrument
is retained with the works.

The disclaimer phrase could be shortened as well, and eased:

Use of the works is permitted provided that this instrument
is retained with the works, which are offered without warranty.

Look at http://www.mplayerhq.hu/
This is an open source movie player project, that has had its source
turn up in various commercial hardware and software.

Also, linux and around a dozen other open-source products appeared in
the linksys WRT54G router, with no notice that it contained open source
stuff, and no source code. (and lots of other similar products (linksys now
provide source))

Taking some of these as examples, it would seem to comply with this license
if I compile the code, distribute the notice and binary in encrypted form.

 

[JeffM]

James William Pye's "Fair License":

---LICENSE---
<Copyright Information>

Utilization of the works is permitted provided that this
instrument is retained with the works, so that any entity
that utilizes the works is notified of this instrument.

DISCLAIMER: THE WORKS ARE WITHOUT WARRANTY.

---LICENSE---

It sure sounds like the BSD licence to me.
(I've never really understood the point of these vanity licences.)

 

[John S. Dyson]

James William Pye's "Fair License":

---LICENSE---
<Copyright Information>

Utilization of the works is permitted provided that this
instrument is retained with the works, so that any entity
that utilizes the works is notified of this instrument.

DISCLAIMER: THE WORKS ARE WITHOUT WARRANTY.

---LICENSE---

It sure sounds like the BSD licence to me.
(I've never really understood the point of these vanity licences.)
[/QUOTE]
A license that forces the ownership attribution and the copyright/license
is really wise to help inform the user of his license to use/redistribute.
The licenses expressed in a single file that is seperate from the source files
can complicate the licensing issue (unless the license is well known and
each source file points to that license document.) IMO, the
software/copyright/license (or a pointer to it) SHOULD reside in the
source file.

On the BSD projects, I was one of of the first to relax the advertising
clause from my copyright and BSD-style license... The old BSD license
really did use to be more of a vanity license.

John