From 70747425d885a8b4a00f31dd64e682ecf751aaae Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Luke Dashjr Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2016 05:10:57 +0000 Subject: bip-0002: Mention OPL problems --- bip-0002.mediawiki | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) (limited to 'bip-0002.mediawiki') 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? -- cgit v1.2.3