Bardbarian on Steam - coming s…
A Meandering Path to an Evolvi…Quick as a FlashThings Every ActionScript Deve…Making Money with Adobe AIRUsing Flash for 3D Game MMO UIUtilizing Flash for Game UI De…Why I (Still) Love FlashMy Favourite Things
Posted on January 7, 2013 by Grant Skinner
I’m definitely not a lawyer and I detest reading legalese, but I have a strong interest in the legal considerations of the technology I work with. One area I’ve done a lot of research into in the past is the implications of different open source licenses, which led to this older blog post comparing common licenses.
Recently, one of my devs asked how this applied to JS and minification. Here’s the quick response I tossed together:
Let’s assume we are looking at the MIT license or an equivalent. Remember that ANY third party code requires client approval, and any license other than MIT should be run past me as well.
The MIT license specifically requires that the license is included somewhere in the software, but it does not need to be public facing. Typically, the license is included as a comment at the top of the source files. However, minification strips out the comments and combines source code into a single file. This raises three possible scenarios:
I’d be interested to hear about how other companies are dealing with this topic, or related ones.
Follow @gskinner on Twitter for more news and views on interactive media.