7 added 67 characters in body
source | link

ISC License – Even shorter than MIT

The ISC License is a briefer equivalent of the MIT License. Simpler words, more readable, easier to immediately comprehend.

And more up-to-date legally. Wikipedia explains that, while functionally equivalent to the BSD/MIT licenses, ISC omits language made unnecessary by the Berne Convention.

This Answer is not arguing whether or not the MIT License change is good or not… I am simply suggesting that if you were to go ahead with the plan for using the MIT License, and if the assertion of the ISC license’s functional equivalence is valid(*), then consider switching from the MIT license to the even shorter ISC License for the sake of simplicity.

ISC License text:

Permission to use, copy, modify, and/or distribute this software for any purpose with or without fee is hereby granted, provided that the above copyright notice and this permission notice appear in all copies.

THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE AUTHOR DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES WITH REGARD TO THIS SOFTWARE INCLUDING ALL IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHOR BE LIABLE FOR ANY SPECIAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR ANY DAMAGES WHATSOEVER RESULTING FROM LOSS OF USE, DATA OR PROFITS, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, NEGLIGENCE OR OTHER TORTIOUS ACTION, ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE USE OR PERFORMANCE OF THIS SOFTWARE.

Free Public License – No notice requirement

If the suggestion above for ISC License makes sense, and if it turns out that the issue of waiving the notice requirement makesdoes not make for a “crayon license“crayon license, then perhaps the best solution is the Free Public License as noted in the Answer by Trilarion.

The Free Public License text is the same as ISC, but truncates the first sentence to eliminate the copyright notice requirement.

Permission to use, copy, modify, and/or distribute this software for any purpose with or without fee is hereby granted.

THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE AUTHOR DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES WITH REGARD TO THIS SOFTWARE INCLUDING ALL IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHOR BE LIABLE FOR ANY SPECIAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR ANY DAMAGES WHATSOEVER RESULTING FROM LOSS OF USE, DATA OR PROFITS, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, NEGLIGENCE OR OTHER TORTIOUS ACTION, ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE USE OR PERFORMANCE OF THIS SOFTWARE.

(*) Caveat: I'm neither an attorney nor an expert.

ISC License – Even shorter than MIT

The ISC License is a briefer equivalent of the MIT License. Simpler words, more readable, easier to immediately comprehend.

And more up-to-date legally. Wikipedia explains that, while functionally equivalent to the BSD/MIT licenses, ISC omits language made unnecessary by the Berne Convention.

This Answer is not arguing whether or not the MIT License change is good or not… I am simply suggesting that if you were to go ahead with the plan for using the MIT License, and if the assertion of the ISC license’s functional equivalence is valid(*), then consider switching from the MIT license to the even shorter ISC License for the sake of simplicity.

ISC License text:

Permission to use, copy, modify, and/or distribute this software for any purpose with or without fee is hereby granted, provided that the above copyright notice and this permission notice appear in all copies.

THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE AUTHOR DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES WITH REGARD TO THIS SOFTWARE INCLUDING ALL IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHOR BE LIABLE FOR ANY SPECIAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR ANY DAMAGES WHATSOEVER RESULTING FROM LOSS OF USE, DATA OR PROFITS, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, NEGLIGENCE OR OTHER TORTIOUS ACTION, ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE USE OR PERFORMANCE OF THIS SOFTWARE.

Free Public License – No notice requirement

If the suggestion above for ISC License makes sense, and if it turns out that the issue of waiving the notice requirement makes for a “crayon license“, then perhaps the best solution is the Free Public License as noted in the Answer by Trilarion.

The Free Public License text is the same as ISC, but truncates the first sentence to eliminate the copyright notice requirement.

Permission to use, copy, modify, and/or distribute this software for any purpose with or without fee is hereby granted.

THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE AUTHOR DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES WITH REGARD TO THIS SOFTWARE INCLUDING ALL IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHOR BE LIABLE FOR ANY SPECIAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR ANY DAMAGES WHATSOEVER RESULTING FROM LOSS OF USE, DATA OR PROFITS, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, NEGLIGENCE OR OTHER TORTIOUS ACTION, ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE USE OR PERFORMANCE OF THIS SOFTWARE.

(*) Caveat: I'm neither an attorney nor an expert.

ISC License – Even shorter than MIT

The ISC License is a briefer equivalent of the MIT License. Simpler words, more readable, easier to immediately comprehend.

And more up-to-date legally. Wikipedia explains that, while functionally equivalent to the BSD/MIT licenses, ISC omits language made unnecessary by the Berne Convention.

This Answer is not arguing whether or not the MIT License change is good or not… I am simply suggesting that if you were to go ahead with the plan for using the MIT License, and if the assertion of the ISC license’s functional equivalence is valid(*), then consider switching from the MIT license to the even shorter ISC License for the sake of simplicity.

ISC License text:

Permission to use, copy, modify, and/or distribute this software for any purpose with or without fee is hereby granted, provided that the above copyright notice and this permission notice appear in all copies.

THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE AUTHOR DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES WITH REGARD TO THIS SOFTWARE INCLUDING ALL IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHOR BE LIABLE FOR ANY SPECIAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR ANY DAMAGES WHATSOEVER RESULTING FROM LOSS OF USE, DATA OR PROFITS, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, NEGLIGENCE OR OTHER TORTIOUS ACTION, ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE USE OR PERFORMANCE OF THIS SOFTWARE.

Free Public License – No notice requirement

If the suggestion above for ISC License makes sense, and if it turns out that the issue of waiving the notice requirement does not make for a crayon license, then perhaps the best solution is the Free Public License as noted in the Answer by Trilarion.

The Free Public License text is the same as ISC, but truncates the first sentence to eliminate the copyright notice requirement.

Permission to use, copy, modify, and/or distribute this software for any purpose with or without fee is hereby granted.

THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE AUTHOR DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES WITH REGARD TO THIS SOFTWARE INCLUDING ALL IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHOR BE LIABLE FOR ANY SPECIAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR ANY DAMAGES WHATSOEVER RESULTING FROM LOSS OF USE, DATA OR PROFITS, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, NEGLIGENCE OR OTHER TORTIOUS ACTION, ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE USE OR PERFORMANCE OF THIS SOFTWARE.

(*) Caveat: I'm neither an attorney nor an expert.

6 replaced http://meta.stackexchange.com/ with https://meta.stackexchange.com/
source | link

ISC License – Even shorter than MIT

The ISC License is a briefer equivalent of the MIT License. Simpler words, more readable, easier to immediately comprehend.

And more up-to-date legally. Wikipedia explains that, while functionally equivalent to the BSD/MIT licenses, ISC omits language made unnecessary by the Berne Convention.

This Answer is not arguing whether or not the MIT License change is good or not… I am simply suggesting that if you were to go ahead with the plan for using the MIT License, and if the assertion of the ISC license’s functional equivalence is valid(*), then consider switching from the MIT license to the even shorter ISC License for the sake of simplicity.

ISC License text:

Permission to use, copy, modify, and/or distribute this software for any purpose with or without fee is hereby granted, provided that the above copyright notice and this permission notice appear in all copies.

THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE AUTHOR DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES WITH REGARD TO THIS SOFTWARE INCLUDING ALL IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHOR BE LIABLE FOR ANY SPECIAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR ANY DAMAGES WHATSOEVER RESULTING FROM LOSS OF USE, DATA OR PROFITS, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, NEGLIGENCE OR OTHER TORTIOUS ACTION, ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE USE OR PERFORMANCE OF THIS SOFTWARE.

Free Public License – No notice requirement

If the suggestion above for ISC License makes sense, and if it turns out that the issue of waiving the notice requirement makes for a “crayon license“, then perhaps the best solution is the Free Public License as noted in the Answer by Trilarionthe Answer by Trilarion.

The Free Public License text is the same as ISC, but truncates the first sentence to eliminate the copyright notice requirement.

Permission to use, copy, modify, and/or distribute this software for any purpose with or without fee is hereby granted.

THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE AUTHOR DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES WITH REGARD TO THIS SOFTWARE INCLUDING ALL IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHOR BE LIABLE FOR ANY SPECIAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR ANY DAMAGES WHATSOEVER RESULTING FROM LOSS OF USE, DATA OR PROFITS, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, NEGLIGENCE OR OTHER TORTIOUS ACTION, ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE USE OR PERFORMANCE OF THIS SOFTWARE.

(*) Caveat: I'm neither an attorney nor an expert.

ISC License – Even shorter than MIT

The ISC License is a briefer equivalent of the MIT License. Simpler words, more readable, easier to immediately comprehend.

And more up-to-date legally. Wikipedia explains that, while functionally equivalent to the BSD/MIT licenses, ISC omits language made unnecessary by the Berne Convention.

This Answer is not arguing whether or not the MIT License change is good or not… I am simply suggesting that if you were to go ahead with the plan for using the MIT License, and if the assertion of the ISC license’s functional equivalence is valid(*), then consider switching from the MIT license to the even shorter ISC License for the sake of simplicity.

ISC License text:

Permission to use, copy, modify, and/or distribute this software for any purpose with or without fee is hereby granted, provided that the above copyright notice and this permission notice appear in all copies.

THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE AUTHOR DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES WITH REGARD TO THIS SOFTWARE INCLUDING ALL IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHOR BE LIABLE FOR ANY SPECIAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR ANY DAMAGES WHATSOEVER RESULTING FROM LOSS OF USE, DATA OR PROFITS, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, NEGLIGENCE OR OTHER TORTIOUS ACTION, ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE USE OR PERFORMANCE OF THIS SOFTWARE.

Free Public License – No notice requirement

If the suggestion above for ISC License makes sense, and if it turns out that the issue of waiving the notice requirement makes for a “crayon license“, then perhaps the best solution is the Free Public License as noted in the Answer by Trilarion.

The Free Public License text is the same as ISC, but truncates the first sentence to eliminate the copyright notice requirement.

Permission to use, copy, modify, and/or distribute this software for any purpose with or without fee is hereby granted.

THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE AUTHOR DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES WITH REGARD TO THIS SOFTWARE INCLUDING ALL IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHOR BE LIABLE FOR ANY SPECIAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR ANY DAMAGES WHATSOEVER RESULTING FROM LOSS OF USE, DATA OR PROFITS, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, NEGLIGENCE OR OTHER TORTIOUS ACTION, ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE USE OR PERFORMANCE OF THIS SOFTWARE.

(*) Caveat: I'm neither an attorney nor an expert.

ISC License – Even shorter than MIT

The ISC License is a briefer equivalent of the MIT License. Simpler words, more readable, easier to immediately comprehend.

And more up-to-date legally. Wikipedia explains that, while functionally equivalent to the BSD/MIT licenses, ISC omits language made unnecessary by the Berne Convention.

This Answer is not arguing whether or not the MIT License change is good or not… I am simply suggesting that if you were to go ahead with the plan for using the MIT License, and if the assertion of the ISC license’s functional equivalence is valid(*), then consider switching from the MIT license to the even shorter ISC License for the sake of simplicity.

ISC License text:

Permission to use, copy, modify, and/or distribute this software for any purpose with or without fee is hereby granted, provided that the above copyright notice and this permission notice appear in all copies.

THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE AUTHOR DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES WITH REGARD TO THIS SOFTWARE INCLUDING ALL IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHOR BE LIABLE FOR ANY SPECIAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR ANY DAMAGES WHATSOEVER RESULTING FROM LOSS OF USE, DATA OR PROFITS, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, NEGLIGENCE OR OTHER TORTIOUS ACTION, ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE USE OR PERFORMANCE OF THIS SOFTWARE.

Free Public License – No notice requirement

If the suggestion above for ISC License makes sense, and if it turns out that the issue of waiving the notice requirement makes for a “crayon license“, then perhaps the best solution is the Free Public License as noted in the Answer by Trilarion.

The Free Public License text is the same as ISC, but truncates the first sentence to eliminate the copyright notice requirement.

Permission to use, copy, modify, and/or distribute this software for any purpose with or without fee is hereby granted.

THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE AUTHOR DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES WITH REGARD TO THIS SOFTWARE INCLUDING ALL IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHOR BE LIABLE FOR ANY SPECIAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR ANY DAMAGES WHATSOEVER RESULTING FROM LOSS OF USE, DATA OR PROFITS, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, NEGLIGENCE OR OTHER TORTIOUS ACTION, ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE USE OR PERFORMANCE OF THIS SOFTWARE.

(*) Caveat: I'm neither an attorney nor an expert.

5 added bolding for emphasis
source | link

ISC License – Even shorter than MIT

The ISC License is a briefer equivalent of the MIT License. Simpler words, more readable, easier to immediately comprehend.

And more up-to-date legally. Wikipedia explains that, while functionally equivalent to the BSD/MIT licenses, ISC omits language made unnecessary by the Berne Convention.

This Answer is not arguing whether or not the MIT License change is good or not… I am simply suggesting that if you were to go ahead with the plan for using the MIT License, and if the assertion of the ISC license’s functional equivalence is valid(*), then consider switching from the MIT license to the even shorter ISC License for the sake of simplicity.

ISC License text:

Permission to use, copy, modify, and/or distribute this software for any purpose with or without fee is hereby granted, provided that the above copyright notice and this permission notice appear in all copies.

THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE AUTHOR DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES WITH REGARD TO THIS SOFTWARE INCLUDING ALL IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHOR BE LIABLE FOR ANY SPECIAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR ANY DAMAGES WHATSOEVER RESULTING FROM LOSS OF USE, DATA OR PROFITS, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, NEGLIGENCE OR OTHER TORTIOUS ACTION, ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE USE OR PERFORMANCE OF THIS SOFTWARE.

Free Public License – No notice requirement

If the suggestion above for ISC License makes sense, and if it turns out that the issue of waiving the notice requirement makes for a “crayon license“, then perhaps the best solution is the Free Public License as noted in the Answer by Trilarion.

The Free Public License text is the same as ISC, but truncates the first sentencetruncates the first sentence to eliminate the copyright notice requirement.

Permission to use, copy, modify, and/or distribute this software for any purpose with or without fee is hereby granted.

THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE AUTHOR DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES WITH REGARD TO THIS SOFTWARE INCLUDING ALL IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHOR BE LIABLE FOR ANY SPECIAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR ANY DAMAGES WHATSOEVER RESULTING FROM LOSS OF USE, DATA OR PROFITS, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, NEGLIGENCE OR OTHER TORTIOUS ACTION, ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE USE OR PERFORMANCE OF THIS SOFTWARE.

(*) Caveat: I'm neither an attorney nor an expert.

ISC License – Even shorter than MIT

The ISC License is a briefer equivalent of the MIT License. Simpler words, more readable, easier to immediately comprehend.

And more up-to-date legally. Wikipedia explains that, while functionally equivalent to the BSD/MIT licenses, ISC omits language made unnecessary by the Berne Convention.

This Answer is not arguing whether or not the MIT License change is good or not… I am simply suggesting that if you were to go ahead with the plan for using the MIT License, and if the assertion of the ISC license’s functional equivalence is valid(*), then consider switching from the MIT license to the even shorter ISC License for the sake of simplicity.

ISC License text:

Permission to use, copy, modify, and/or distribute this software for any purpose with or without fee is hereby granted, provided that the above copyright notice and this permission notice appear in all copies.

THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE AUTHOR DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES WITH REGARD TO THIS SOFTWARE INCLUDING ALL IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHOR BE LIABLE FOR ANY SPECIAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR ANY DAMAGES WHATSOEVER RESULTING FROM LOSS OF USE, DATA OR PROFITS, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, NEGLIGENCE OR OTHER TORTIOUS ACTION, ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE USE OR PERFORMANCE OF THIS SOFTWARE.

Free Public License – No notice requirement

If the suggestion above for ISC License makes sense, and if it turns out that the issue of waiving the notice requirement makes for a “crayon license“, then perhaps the best solution is the Free Public License as noted in the Answer by Trilarion.

The Free Public License text is the same as ISC, but truncates the first sentence to eliminate the copyright notice requirement.

Permission to use, copy, modify, and/or distribute this software for any purpose with or without fee is hereby granted.

THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE AUTHOR DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES WITH REGARD TO THIS SOFTWARE INCLUDING ALL IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHOR BE LIABLE FOR ANY SPECIAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR ANY DAMAGES WHATSOEVER RESULTING FROM LOSS OF USE, DATA OR PROFITS, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, NEGLIGENCE OR OTHER TORTIOUS ACTION, ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE USE OR PERFORMANCE OF THIS SOFTWARE.

(*) Caveat: I'm neither an attorney nor an expert.

ISC License – Even shorter than MIT

The ISC License is a briefer equivalent of the MIT License. Simpler words, more readable, easier to immediately comprehend.

And more up-to-date legally. Wikipedia explains that, while functionally equivalent to the BSD/MIT licenses, ISC omits language made unnecessary by the Berne Convention.

This Answer is not arguing whether or not the MIT License change is good or not… I am simply suggesting that if you were to go ahead with the plan for using the MIT License, and if the assertion of the ISC license’s functional equivalence is valid(*), then consider switching from the MIT license to the even shorter ISC License for the sake of simplicity.

ISC License text:

Permission to use, copy, modify, and/or distribute this software for any purpose with or without fee is hereby granted, provided that the above copyright notice and this permission notice appear in all copies.

THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE AUTHOR DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES WITH REGARD TO THIS SOFTWARE INCLUDING ALL IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHOR BE LIABLE FOR ANY SPECIAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR ANY DAMAGES WHATSOEVER RESULTING FROM LOSS OF USE, DATA OR PROFITS, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, NEGLIGENCE OR OTHER TORTIOUS ACTION, ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE USE OR PERFORMANCE OF THIS SOFTWARE.

Free Public License – No notice requirement

If the suggestion above for ISC License makes sense, and if it turns out that the issue of waiving the notice requirement makes for a “crayon license“, then perhaps the best solution is the Free Public License as noted in the Answer by Trilarion.

The Free Public License text is the same as ISC, but truncates the first sentence to eliminate the copyright notice requirement.

Permission to use, copy, modify, and/or distribute this software for any purpose with or without fee is hereby granted.

THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE AUTHOR DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES WITH REGARD TO THIS SOFTWARE INCLUDING ALL IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHOR BE LIABLE FOR ANY SPECIAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR ANY DAMAGES WHATSOEVER RESULTING FROM LOSS OF USE, DATA OR PROFITS, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, NEGLIGENCE OR OTHER TORTIOUS ACTION, ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE USE OR PERFORMANCE OF THIS SOFTWARE.

(*) Caveat: I'm neither an attorney nor an expert.

4 added 109 characters in body
source | link
3 added 45 characters in body
source | link
2 Added section on Free Public License.
source | link
1
source | link