[En-Nut-Discussion] RFC: Copyright of trivial code

[Harald Kipp]

On 3/19/2011 5:14 AM, Thiago A. Corrêa wrote:

> What is wrong with simply sticking with revised BSD license? It's
> compatible with both closed source usage and GPL

There are cases, where even the less restrictive BSDL may not fit. For 
such cases the user should feel free to change the license to whatever 
he likes.

Example: Someone may decide to take over several simple Nut/OS headers 
to save some typing work. Right now, he must publish the copyright 
notice somewhere together with his code. If he wants to avoid this, he 
needs to type his own version, which, if it's a trivial file, will 
probably look almost the same. This is idiotic.

If I, the original author, did not feel that a file contains any mental 
effort, I do not want to force others to retype it just to avoid any 
copyright violation.

Regards,

Harald