How to Choose an Open Source License | HackBeanpot 2018

Presented at the HackBeanpot 2018 hackathon
Open source projects are unique in that they invite the world to use, improve and share them. No code is ever assumed to be "open-source". As a pieces of creative work all code comes with an implicit copyright claim by the creator(s). If you want the code, software or framework you create to be open-source you need an open-source license. But with many types of open-source licenses to choose from, how do you select the “right one”?
This presentation walks through the values of creating open-source software and how to select which type of open-source license is right for your project. Attendees of this session will walk out with three fundamental lessons:
The value that open-source software provides to the world.
An understanding of the differences between the three(3) main types of open-source licenses available.
Steps to follow to select the right open-source license for your project.

[@pandabrain]

The license change from facebook was about react.
Angular is developed by google.

[@TuxHouseEdu]

Thank you Michael!

[@tombonner2799]

25:50
Just a heads up. Angular is owned by Google, and React is owned by Facebook

[@hackerhaddi]

thanks for recording this talk and uploading it.

[@Cookie_Wookie_7]

I'm pretty sure angular is made by Google not Facebook.
Maybe you were thinking of React. React is made by Facebook.

[@IARRCSim]

yeah, that made the presenter sound untrustworthy. He sounded so confident talking about that when he clearly didn't know what he was talking about.

[@tsundoku5733]

22:38: Surely the Eclipse Public license is a weak copyleft license, not a strong copyleft one?
You also forgot to mention the GNU Affero Public License, which is a strong copyleft licence that is also triggered by making the software accessible for use over a network (GPL 2 and GPL 3 aren't triggered by SAAS deployment).
32:25: Copyleft does not put restrictions on what you *create* using the code; imposing such restrictions would violate a basic premise of software freedom. So you can perfectly use strong copyleft code such as GNU Emacs and the GNU Compiler Collection (GCC) to create proprietary software. The only situation where you need to be careful of a GPL tool that you use copies part of its own code into the product, which is usually not the case.

[@memest137]

Thanks man, one new subscribers it's me

[@JRudd]

Good presentation. I'd like to note that an unregistered copyright gives you very limited rights when it comes to your ability to take someone to court for copyright infringement. A registered copyright however gives you that right.

[@TheJeremyKentBGross]

Register with whom?

[@idrissberchil25]

Very informative

[@TheLavaBlock]

Great Talk

[@marcello4258]

what I honestly do not get i.e. the MIT or Apache 2.0 state that the license text MUST be included in derivatives. This implies that the derivative ALSO needs to have the SAME license and this goes also for binary files.. Hence afaik all software must be open source which does not go with what I've learned in this talk.

[@valentinaditoiu8854]

It's not that the derivative must be further distributed under the same MIT or Apache license, but that the derivative must include the MIT/Apache license for that piece of code that originally came with the MIT/Apache license.

[@leonardotassodossantos7077]

Great video, thanks for sharing this knowledge. Made my decisions way easier!

[@keyvanzare4685]

What did you use to make the presentation? it looks cool.

[@mikemiles86]

The presentation is built in reveal.js

[@keyvanzare4685]

Thanks

[@nftd8123]

Than you!! great video

[@teresajones8389]

Is it legal for a hacker to install all these licenses to someone else's phone and completely control their phone?

[@amitkriit]

How to cloud-proof an open source project?