# Preamble

By ancient rites, this code is bound,
No mortal hand may twist it 'round.

# Terms of Use

Permission granted: to mend and make,
To copy, share, for spirit's sake.
Yet mark: no coin, no profit gained,
Shall taint this magic, unrestrained.

# Disclaimer

Provided "as is," without a truth,
No crone will blame, if ill, forsooth.

# Enforcement

The pact by moonlight, strongly spun,
Binds souls if greed hath now been won.

# Cost

The threads are spun, the spell complete,
No greed, lest curses, you shall meet.

Good license though I might need to consult a witch instead of a lawyer for an exact interpretation.

top 13 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] db2@lemmy.world 50 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I'm gonna use it on something harmless, like the code that opens a gate located on Mars.

[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 22 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

You can’t just shoot a hole into the surface of Mars

[–] camr_on@lemmy.world 14 points 2 weeks ago

Objective updated: shoot a hole into Mars

[–] Cevilia@lemmy.blahaj.zone 23 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

It's funny, but... no, it's not a good license.

[–] lesnout27@feddit.org 3 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Can you elaborate, please?

[–] Cevilia@lemmy.blahaj.zone 23 points 2 weeks ago

It's really vague, it doesn't define its terms, and despite all of that it somehow still manages to be self-contradictory which is frankly impressive.

[–] sudo_halt@lemmygrad.ml 9 points 2 weeks ago

The GNU licenses are written in the way they are because they were written with long legal counsel and analyzing actual law.

A text like this, other than the no commercial bullshit which may do more harm than any good, is not good legal text and leaves too much to interpretation. Also using a rhyme as a license may be rejected by some certain courts.

[–] pelya@lemmy.world 21 points 2 weeks ago

Non-commercial usage restriction makes this license not FOSS compatible.
Additionally, 'no mortal hand' restriction is strange, it permits someone like medusa to modify the code while forbidding that to actual software engineers, and would a software engineer dictating code to a medusa be a breach of this clause? I'm not saying that long-lived organisms cannot obtain programming skills, but it is exceedingly rare.

[–] cornshark@lemmy.world 14 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

What's the difference between twisting the code around (which is forbidden) and mending it (which is allowed)?

[–] db2@lemmy.world 12 points 2 weeks ago

That is talking about the license, it's saying you can't relicense a derivative.

[–] dohpaz42@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

Changing the original intent versus submitting patches?

[–] alsaaas@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 2 weeks ago

Very good meme license, but please for the love of god never use it for any project of yours

[–] Thedogdrinkscoffee@lemmy.ca 12 points 2 weeks ago

I love this. Thanks.