even if you don't write "copyright" anywhere
There are a few exceptions to that rule:
Only the copyright owner can give legal permission for others to copy, modify, or distribute the work.
Unfortunately, no. Copyright law is very specific.
Implied licenses are difficult to establish.
"tqdm’s source code is OSS, and all versions are archived at the DOI 10.5281/zenodo.595120. The primary maintainer Casper da Costa-Luis releases contributions under the terms of the MPLv2.0, while all other contributions are released under the terms of the MIT licence (tqdm developers, 2019b)."
"tqdm’s source code is OSS, and all versions are archived at the DOI 10.5281/zenodo.595120. The primary maintainer Casper da Costa-Luis releases contributions under the terms of the MPLv2.0, while all other contributions are released under the terms of the MIT licence (tqdm developers, 2019b)."
It's great and many people do but that could also be somewhat driven by the fact that it's the first option on GitHub.
Note: Creative Commons Licenses are not intended to be used on code.
Free Redistribution
Source Code
Derived Works
No Discrimination Against Persons or Groups
No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavors
License Must Not Be Specific to a Product
(how it's distributed doesn't matter)
Open Source Licenses have many qualities, but these are the ones I usually remind people of:
You can specify a boilerplate copyright notice and go with something like an attribution assurance license, BUT citation is a cultural construct adjudicated by publishers.
You can't make people cite you.
It's best practice to also archive a copy of your code and include the code's DOI in the citation file.
People might want to use your work in a context where there won’t be a resulting publication or citations won't apply.
Putting your citation requirements in your license may even impede software preservation, since that’s a use that doesn’t directly result in scientific writing.
Modifying a standard license can also lead to decreased usage of your software.
If you want to reuse software that doesn't have a license, and you have contacted the authors and they have not specified a license, can you still reuse the code?
Fair use doctrine allows individuals to use a copyrighted work without permission from the copyright owner.
Things to consider:
Copying, modifying, or sharing computer programs for research purposes can qualify as fair use, but this is determined on a case by case basis.
Courts have said fair use permits users to copy software in order to study how it works and create new compatible or interoperable technologies.
That said, copying or sharing proprietary software so it can be used by a colleague for its original purpose is very unlikely to be a fair use.
We wrote a guide about all of this!