Timeline for Is an SDPX header legally equivalent to a license header?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
3 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 5, 2021 at 16:45 | comment | added | Criticize SE actions means ban |
# This file released under Apache license 2.0 would seem to be a common convention (for lazy people). And I don't imagine # SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0 would be any different, provided it was put there by the copyright holder. Of course if someone else is going through all the files and trying to assign the appropriate SPDX identifiers, and puts the wrong one there, it doesn't constitute a license grant.
|
|
| Mar 1, 2021 at 19:07 | comment | added | David Siegel | If one wants others to be able to use the files in any way, some sort of license is needed. Without a license no one can legally use the code in any way. An identifying copyright notice in some way associated with the computer code is good practice, and can make copyright claims easier to establish. It is not legally required to have a notice at all, much less in each file, but it is often a good idea | |
| Mar 1, 2021 at 17:12 | history | answered | MSalters | CC BY-SA 4.0 |