On 11/17/2009 05:15 AM, Paul Howarth wrote: > Hi, > > Upstream of perl-Module-Signature has relicensed it from MIT to Creative > Commons CC0 1.0 Universal. Since the "good licenses for software" list > on the wiki doesn't explicitly mention CC0 I thought I'd ask here if > it's OK to tag such as package as "Public Domain" or should there be a > separate entry in the list for CC0? > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing#Good_Licenses > > http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ > > http://search.cpan.org/dist/Module-Signature/lib/Module/Signature.pm#CC0_1.0_Universal > > > Please Cc: me on any replies as I'm not subscribed to fedora-legal-list. It probably merits a separate entry, because it is a rather thorough public domain declaration. Use: License: CC0 I've added it to the Good list for software and content (its good for anything, really, but it is most likely to be used in those areas). It is Free and GPL Compatible. ~spot _______________________________________________ Fedora-legal-list mailing list Fedora-legal-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legal-list
