From charlie at stat.umn.edu  Wed Jan 18 18:09:02 2017
From: charlie at stat.umn.edu (Charles Geyer)
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2017 11:09:02 -0600
Subject: [Rd] unlicense
In-Reply-To: <22655.36167.116176.881303@aragorn.wu.ac.at>
References: <CAKctRd3bWPGhzN3McdJQovTthUt=AYVQV3g-ZKNvEt5jZ1JnmA@mail.gmail.com>
	<09cb536a-cdba-1eeb-b6a0-4bad571032bd@gmail.com>
	<CADfFDC5HB+qCk0it_AW9wuHSHdDqJ-rRW=NeL=S3SYrPR5GZ1g@mail.gmail.com>
	<c9c4e11d-4476-ed46-3ff7-ed68c3a83145@statistik.tu-dortmund.de>
	<CABz6aZdx9PXcU2fRtXRyJ_k_7BVW+jjTcnka_2o2zvNW+8KQUg@mail.gmail.com>
	<a9b2554d-8b7e-06b5-8786-26d53e1971a5@statistik.tu-dortmund.de>
	<CABz6aZevNNXpSZUY-OxQe+JJZe9OKufnVFExEr7rQ7QHVnT2NQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJXgQP1DU_18xfLhMrqC=qvpcb77s5m3c5rEymLwr7vLikK3UA@mail.gmail.com>
	<1484745819.15208.18.camel@braverock.com>
	<CAKctRd13M842zRptxHWg4YtnpR1dS=0KCjqNmarqKhXw3Ma6jA@mail.gmail.com>
	<22655.36167.116176.881303@aragorn.wu.ac.at>
Message-ID: <CAKctRd3tdp2U-7MwZaTHh3L3+VRM1_o0DpgkxsgauQ=VSW36Wg@mail.gmail.com>

I was looking at https://www.r-project.org/Licenses/ which is first
when you google for "R licenses".  Silly me.  Kurt says I should have
been looking at share/licenses/license.db in the R source tree.
Thanks.  I'm satisfied now.

I don't have any CRAN packages with "Unlimited" on them, but I do have
some on github that are just examples for teaching.  I'll change them
to CC0.

On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 9:44 AM, Kurt Hornik <Kurt.Hornik at wu.ac.at> wrote:
>>>>>> Charles Geyer writes:
>
>> In that case, perhaps the question could be changed to could CC0 be
>> added to the list of R licences.  Right now the only CC licence that
>> is in the R licenses is CC-BY-SA-4.0.
>
> Hmm, I see
>
> Name: CC0
> FSF: free_and_GPLv3_compatible (https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#CC0)
> OSI: NA (https://opensource.org/faq#cc-zero)
> URL: https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/legalcode
> FOSS: yes
>
> in the R license db ...
>
> -k
>
>> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 7:23 AM, Brian G. Peterson <brian at braverock.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, 2017-01-17 at 22:46 -0500, Kevin Ushey wrote:
>>>> It appears that Unlicense is considered a free and GPL-compatible
>>>> license; however, the page does suggest using CC0 instead (which is
>>>> indeed a license approved / recognized by CRAN). CC0 appears to be
>>>> the primary license recommended by the FSF for software intended for
>>>> the public domain.
>>>
>>> I'd second the recommendation for CC0.  Lawyers at IP-restrictive firms
>>> I've worked for in the past have been OK with this license.
>>>
>>> - Brian
>>>
>
>
>
>> --
>> Charles Geyer
>> Professor, School of Statistics
>> Resident Fellow, Minnesota Center for Philosophy of Science
>> University of Minnesota
>> charlie at stat.umn.edu
>
>> ______________________________________________
>> R-devel at r-project.org mailing list
>> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel



-- 
Charles Geyer
Professor, School of Statistics
Resident Fellow, Minnesota Center for Philosophy of Science
University of Minnesota
charlie at stat.umn.edu



[Rd] unlicense
Charles Geyer