It means that any company can take that code, modify it (as would be required every year per IRS tax changes), and resell it without being required to publish the source code changes.

What many European countries are doing is requiring the government to publish code under a copyleft license. That would allow companies to also benefit from this code to make their own tools (which they could also sell), and it would require them to publish the source code of their improvements.

Basically copyleft legally ensures collaboration. Public domain does not.

[–] HiddenLayer555@lemmy.ml 6 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

IIRC all US government projects HAVE to be CC0 if released to the public. I think the idea is it was created with public money so there shouldn't be any restrictions on how the public can use it.

[–] jagged_circle@feddit.nl 8 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

That was before copyleft was a thing. Many European governments are now requiring tax funded software to be copyleft.

There are exceptions to that law, such as the USPS. Sounds like we need to contact our legislators to get the law updated

Licensing CC0 is just subsidizing corporations at the expense of tax payers. It should be copyleft because it was funded publicly

[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 months ago

I want to think here that this is more about not knowing about licenses than malice.

They did open it.

If open source developers can now keep the tax code updated, you're all golden