One talks about mine being legally weak, and this even is completely horrenduous?
About legallity, I can`t imagine a court, saying "ok, someone took your code and released it as closed source, we can`t see your licence covering this". How full of shit is it possible to get in these courts?
You throw all that shit and you end up saying "peace"? in any case your trolling won't change the fact that if I want to release my code under the BSD license, I will, and that's because I DON'T CARE going to court or some other people making forks (privative or not) of my code ...
It's a tool, and i'ts the right tool for the right job ... if I picked that tool, is because it clearly accomplishes the job I wanted to do.
Funny thing, seems that GNU zealots thinks that no ones read the licenses (the short and full legal text) before picking one for the code ...
You are mindless enough to think that is some user you have a personal issue with too? That actually seems to be common online too. It`s "him" or "this or that". If you combine your querulantia with paranoia, you have a well known psychiatric disease.
As I have experienced rumourmills online before, and seen their pathetic behaviour, I have made a little website, with information on, only supporting people like me. That means people with the logic ability of a hacker, yet a monotheist. So you can expect the same logic sensibility as a fine tuned assembly program, from this.
So any confusion with any other user should be quite uneccesary. As they do not posess this knowledge, and it is rare, in the typically starved west, on these issues.
Seems like a good start. But even if the language is tightened and the details filled in, is the basic concept enforceable? If Oracle buys the company (and the companies copyrighted Maximal works) what stops them from changing to a different proprietary license? As the copyright holder, they have the legal right to change the license they use for works they own.