summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/bip-0002.mediawiki
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorLuke Dashjr <luke-jr+git@utopios.org>2016-09-24 05:10:57 +0000
committerLuke Dashjr <luke-jr+git@utopios.org>2016-09-24 06:27:08 +0000
commit70747425d885a8b4a00f31dd64e682ecf751aaae (patch)
treec5ae26a9587f835b0fb57df016e16f6f2239af7a /bip-0002.mediawiki
parentf2e6bbd2190060e2e9c769d8e2d5d7d2c4e30eb1 (diff)
bip-0002: Mention OPL problems
Diffstat (limited to 'bip-0002.mediawiki')
-rw-r--r--bip-0002.mediawiki1
1 files changed, 1 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/bip-0002.mediawiki b/bip-0002.mediawiki
index a98be7b..c9e817d 100644
--- a/bip-0002.mediawiki
+++ b/bip-0002.mediawiki
@@ -375,6 +375,7 @@ BIP 1 allowed the Open Publication License or releasing into the public domain;
* The OPL is generally regarded as obsolete, and not a license suitable for new publications.
* Many are unfamiliar with the OPL terms, and may just prefer to use the public domain rather than license under uncertain terms.
+* The OPL license terms allowed for the author to prevent publication and derived works, which was widely considered inappropriate for Bitcoin standards.
* Public domain is not universally recognised as a legitimate action, thus it is inadvisable.
Why are there software licenses included?