@dessalines@lemmy.ml, @nutomic@lemmy.ml, have you thought about re-licensing Lemmy using one of these licenses? Are you able to re-license contributor code (like do you have a clause in the TOS for that)?
I’m not a huge fan of using alternate, less used licenses like this. The GPL / AGPL is very well thought out for software, has gone through rounds of revisions based on actual legal case history. Its also the strongest copyleft license we have, forcing all forks to share their code.
@dessalines@lemmy.ml, @nutomic@lemmy.ml, have you thought about re-licensing Lemmy using one of these licenses? Are you able to re-license contributor code (like do you have a clause in the TOS for that)?
I’m not a huge fan of using alternate, less used licenses like this. The GPL / AGPL is very well thought out for software, has gone through rounds of revisions based on actual legal case history. Its also the strongest copyleft license we have, forcing all forks to share their code.
Fair enough
One would need to have a CLA-requirement to contributions that allows such relicensing. (Or that the original license allows relicensing)
That’s what I meant. I was asking if Lemmy had that.
Yeah, just wanted to clarify it was different from the lemmy.ml ToS.
Yeah, my mistake, should have been more precise.