Lookup any software license shortly summarized in plain English(tldrlegal.com)
tldrlegal.com
Lookup any software license shortly summarized in plain English
http://www.tldrlegal.com/
23 comments
Besides the UI it's confusing.
For example, if you check the GPLv3 it says "Must: Include Source", which is incorrect (you must include the source code ONLY if there's distribution).
If you click on the "Include Source" text, then it shows a note saying "Copies of the software/instructions to obtain copies must be distributed with the software".
The quick summary isn't brilliant either.
As TL;DR doesn't work very well if you can get incorrect information.
For example, if you check the GPLv3 it says "Must: Include Source", which is incorrect (you must include the source code ONLY if there's distribution).
If you click on the "Include Source" text, then it shows a note saying "Copies of the software/instructions to obtain copies must be distributed with the software".
The quick summary isn't brilliant either.
As TL;DR doesn't work very well if you can get incorrect information.
Should probably be http://ianaltldrlegal/
From Kevin (TLDRLegal Guy):
Got it. I am adding some things to distinguish the two.
Um, GPL2 helpfully doesn't include mention of including source in summary, although it's there in the blue box (under "must"). Also, for someone unfamiliar, it would be helpful to explain _which_ source: the library you're including or the entire source of your work which includes the GPL'd library.
"You may copy, distribute and modify the software as long as you retain this license, track changes/dates of in source files and keep it GPL."
"You may copy, distribute and modify the software as long as you retain this license, track changes/dates of in source files and keep it GPL."
BSD and MIT:
Change License
This software allows you to switch licenses.
You can change the license of derivative works, even if you do not hold the copyright on the original code.
You can stack additional licenses on top, but that's not the same as the right to change the license. Also, why isn't apache 2 listed as a "changeable" license?
From Kevin (TLDRLegal Guy):
Got it, thanks! I clarified it to "Sublicense".
Same for LGPL.
Some feedback:
1. The search is broken. I couldn't find the Apache license using a half-dozen tries, including searches like "Apache", "Apache2", and "ASL".
2. One of the big issues with open source licenses is knowing which licenses are compatible with what. Can I use the EPL with the ASL? What about the LGPL? That information is hard to find.
1. The search is broken. I couldn't find the Apache license using a half-dozen tries, including searches like "Apache", "Apache2", and "ASL".
2. One of the big issues with open source licenses is knowing which licenses are compatible with what. Can I use the EPL with the ASL? What about the LGPL? That information is hard to find.
AD1. You need to type "apache" and wait for suggestions to pop up. I agree it's broken though, the search shouldn't be so strict.
Ah, and that also requires JavaScript, which I normally have turned off.
It's mid 2012, why are you browsing the web with javascript off? I realize you want safeguard privacy and whatnot, but at least turn it on for website you use legitimately.
Because in 2012 every little website ends up loading two dozen external scripts.
I only allow it when a website is unusable without it.
I only allow it when a website is unusable without it.
He's in the same class of users that brag about not owning a tv: http://www.theonion.com/articles/area-man-constantly-mention...
I hack on my mechanical keyboard, with my keyboard driven window manager, using my television as a monitor, because I don't pay for cable while I browse the interwebs using emacs or maybe elinks (with TABS on but JAVASCRIPT OFF) unless I have to use a graphical terminal for something like flash or java in which case I use firefox with noscript and allow scripts as needed until things work.
But, I recently shaved my neckbeard. So there's that going for my class!
But, I recently shaved my neckbeard. So there's that going for my class!
I wonder if anyone on Hacker News does the excellent service of doublechecking linked pages for attempted nastiness.
"Any" software license? Hardly. Although this is quite useful for the FOSS licenses they have now, what I really would like is to have all those licenses for commercial proprietary software to be translated into something clear. Same for websites and online services served through apps.
That would be something great. They should include TL;DR's for popular websites' Terms and Conditions.
Good until they change.
The creator of this site is reading all of your feedback. He gives his thanks, but warns that this site wasn't supposed to be ready to launch yet.
(I know him in RL, and right now new HN accounts cannot be created.)
(I know him in RL, and right now new HN accounts cannot be created.)
> I know him in RL, and right now new HN accounts cannot be created.
They cannot be created from the login page, but a prompt is offered to create a new account when replying to a comment.
They cannot be created from the login page, but a prompt is offered to create a new account when replying to a comment.
This is Kevin. Finally able to get an account (it kept on telling me "too many new accounts"). Anyways, I just wanted to let you know that your thoughts are heard and put into action!
Something which isn't commented on anywhere else:
The two more common uses of "shortly" indicate something is going to happen soon and that something was phrased in a curt, abrupt manner.
Almost all uses of shortly that mean "concise" also tend to have the curt, abrupt, somewhat negative connotation. The only times I've seen uses of shortly that have only the "brief" shade of meaning, there is still a connotation of something simple, that somehow someone has overlooked. (Example: "to put it shortly," which is interchangeable with, "to put it simply.")
Because of this, no native English speaker would title a such headline in a positive sense with the adjective "shortly" meaning brief.
Admittedly, this is confusing because "shortly" used in the sense of "happening soon" does often carry a positive connotation. Unfortunately, English is Byzantine and full of exceptions and connotations and not completely orthogonal. (It is orthogonal here from a strictly syntactic sense, but not from the common usage one.)
The two more common uses of "shortly" indicate something is going to happen soon and that something was phrased in a curt, abrupt manner.
Almost all uses of shortly that mean "concise" also tend to have the curt, abrupt, somewhat negative connotation. The only times I've seen uses of shortly that have only the "brief" shade of meaning, there is still a connotation of something simple, that somehow someone has overlooked. (Example: "to put it shortly," which is interchangeable with, "to put it simply.")
Because of this, no native English speaker would title a such headline in a positive sense with the adjective "shortly" meaning brief.
Admittedly, this is confusing because "shortly" used in the sense of "happening soon" does often carry a positive connotation. Unfortunately, English is Byzantine and full of exceptions and connotations and not completely orthogonal. (It is orthogonal here from a strictly syntactic sense, but not from the common usage one.)
Perhaps some examples of licences could be good on the front page. I wasn't really sure what to search for, and all the ones I put in weren't found, and then I'm not a lawyer so I wouldn't be able to tl;dr very well.
I agree. It difficult to use when you don't know what you don't know.
May tag cloud of licences would be beneficial?
May tag cloud of licences would be beneficial?
True. I typed "gplv3" too fast for the autosuggest dropdown to kick in, and got nothing. Had I typed "gpl", I would have gotten some suggestions.
Specifically: in the left-side margin, add a column of logos that link to some of the most frequently used licenses (apache, BSD, GPLv2, etc)
From Kevin (TLDRLegal Guy):
I added an example in the textbox. I hope that helps.
Although this would qualify as a "Thanks" kind of response, I'd like to add a note on how much pain this solves for several people in my circle. We ended up several times searching and trying to find a single place for a summary of the licenses (opensource.org worked well in keeping everything else at the same place though).
This is something I would share and recommend.
This is something I would share and recommend.
I also gave it a try to create a central summary of several open source licenses and what to do. Without a search, but just a list of the licenses and todos, maybe you find it useful too:
http://www.patrick-wied.at/blog/how-to-correctly-use-code-yo...
I would love a reverse lookup, so that I can pick the Can and Cannots and a list of licenses that qualify would come up.
Awesome tool, thanks.
Awesome tool, thanks.
From Kevin (TLDRLegal Guy):
Great feedback. I am going to add that right now. Look forward to seeing that change pushed to the site in an hour or so.
I just submitted WTFPL[1] :)
[1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WTFPL
[1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WTFPL
To be fair I dont think this one needs a tldr...
From Kevin (TLDRLegal Guy):
Too bad, it's on. :D
You didn't put either the whole name nor the version :)
Simple English Wikipedia has entries on some software licenses in plain english as well[0], although without such nice visualisation as at TL;DRLegal.
[0] E.g., http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License)
[0] E.g., http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License)
Finally, what I've been looking for. No I can easily see some (at least the major) differences between licenses, or perform a very quick "is this library ok for commercial use?" assert
When there is only 22 entries, there is no need for a search box.
I'm missing some contact information on the page. The feedback button redirects me to some Google Moderator page, whatever that is, but aside from the black top bar the page stays blank. Yes, I already tried rebooting...
What I wanted to say is already commented here on HackerNews though: searching for "GPL" for example, you get a not-found. You'll indeed need to wait for suggestions to come up before you can click a licence. These suggestions should appear on the results page too.
What I wanted to say is already commented here on HackerNews though: searching for "GPL" for example, you get a not-found. You'll indeed need to wait for suggestions to come up before you can click a licence. These suggestions should appear on the results page too.
From Kevin (TLDRLegal Guy):
Done. There is no longer a delay and submitting only part of the title will redirect you to the page.
Does the "embed options" button ever give more than a link? It seems a bit pointless as it is, as you can just copy that from the address bar.
Also, is there any approval process? If not, I think people should have to register to submit, have a "vouch" button, or something, so we know who we're trusting.
Finally, when all the fields in the submit form have validation errors, the submit button disappears.
Also, is there any approval process? If not, I think people should have to register to submit, have a "vouch" button, or something, so we know who we're trusting.
Finally, when all the fields in the submit form have validation errors, the submit button disappears.
From Kevin (TLDRLegal Guy):
As it is inDev, "embed options" is incomplete. It will eventually have image links, iframe options, short links, and etc.
As for the approval process, I manually go through and verify it's correct.
Finally, I will look into the submission validation errors.
Thanks!
As for the approval process, I manually go through and verify it's correct.
Finally, I will look into the submission validation errors.
Thanks!
I want to let you know that your site gets a reputation of -7.1 on a scale ranging from -10 to 10 on senderbase.org.
This is bad because my silly university blocks all websites with a reputation of less than -6, thus I was only able to see it through a proxy.
Note: I tried to get useful actual facts on why it is badly rated but I did not succeed.
This is bad because my silly university blocks all websites with a reputation of less than -6, thus I was only able to see it through a proxy.
Note: I tried to get useful actual facts on why it is badly rated but I did not succeed.
Great ! That will prove really useful to me, as my mind refuses to store any information license-related..
Not convinced by the UI tough : a search box with a closed (& short) list of possibilities, really ?
PS: How can you write "summariZed in plain English" ? ;)
Not convinced by the UI tough : a search box with a closed (& short) list of possibilities, really ?
PS: How can you write "summariZed in plain English" ? ;)
This is a great idea! I would agree with brixon that there is no need for a search box, yet, but I've been looking for something exactly like this. I'm sure you'll get the kinks worked out. Thanks!
Hey guys, launching in beta today.
Official launch thread is here, in case you want to support:
http://hackerne.ws/item?id=4219591
Affero GPL are missing. And FDL. Submitted them.
How do you save post in hackernews?
Upvote to save. View saved articles here: https://news.ycombinator.com/saved?id=BaconJuice
1) It shows no differences between GPLv2 and GPLv3. It's not a good sign.
2) I would put shitloads of banners everywhere saying that you're using this site at your own risk.