im.py: a python communications tool

[Jake D]

On Apr 7, 6:36 pm, Steven D'Aprano <steve
+comp.lang.pyt... at pearwood.info> wrote:
> On Sun, 07 Apr 2013 14:47:11 -0700, jhunter.dunefsky wrote:
> > Actually, my current licence can be found here:
> >https://github.com/jhunter-d/im.py/blob/master/LICENCE.  Whaddaya think
> > about this, Useneters?
>
> I think you're looking for a world of pain, when somebody uses your
> software, it breaks something, and they sue you. Your licence currently
> means that you are responsible for the performance of your software.
>
> Why don't you use a recognised, tested, legally-correct licence, like the
> MIT licence, instead of trying to be clever and/or lazy with a one-liner?
>
> E.g.http://opensource.org/licenses/MIT
>
> Software licencing is a solved problem. Do you really think that people
> write three or four paragraph licences because they *like* legal
> boilerplate? Did you imagine that you were the first person to think, "I
> know! I'll write a one-liner telling people they can do whatever they
> want with my software! Nothing can possibly go wrong!"?
>
> Use a known, tested, working solution, and save yourself the pain.
>
> --
> Steven

MIT is actually the best one I've seen so far.  I'm updating LICENCE.