Can I specify licencing terms for posted code/documentation?

[gzarkadas]

I want to include the following piece of text in my signature, in order to avoid entering disclaimers in every piece of code or documentation that I may enter in my posts:

Posted code is provided under the GNU General Public Licence (http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html), Version 2.0 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation.
Posted documentation is provided under the GNU Free Documentation Licence (http://www.gnu.org/licenses/fdl.html), Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts.


Is this an allowed action in this forum?
I have the feeling that it is, since I haven't come upon anything stating otherwise either in the forum rules or on the post's appeared from the relevant searches. Nevertheless, I thought it was better to ask before actually doing it.

[stephanV]

I don't think it is disallowed, but I don't think it is necessary either. Posting snippets of code or documentation with a referral to the source (which is necessary anyway) should normally be enough. I assume you are not going to post the full source code of an app or a complete document, in that case it would be better to provide a link.

With such a disclaimer you actually have to be careful you are not posting snippets of code that are not GPL.

[gzarkadas]

I don't think it is disallowed, but I don't think it is necessary either. Posting snippets of code or documentation with a referral to the source (which is necessary anyway) should normally be enough. I assume you are not going to post the full source code of an app or a complete document, in that case it would be better to provide a link.

With such a disclaimer you actually have to be careful you are not posting snippets of code that are not GPL.

I am concerned merely about pieces of source code which I may present in a post before incorporating them into my publicly visible projects (which are all GPL anyway) and thus there is no way to give a referral link.

I will rephrase the text to make clear the distinction regarding the origin of code or follow the 'traditional' way of entering the disclaimer inline; thanks for the last point.

[Neo Neko]

AFAIK you may specify any sort of license you like. It's all good and well. Just be aware that after posting it on a publicly avalible forum you can't claim trade secret status etc. :p Though I don't see how usefull licensing small code snippits is generally going to be. They are generally small and trivial pieces of code that someone else could easily derive in isolation most times. So how do you tell if someone violated the license. for a full aplication etc it is generally easier to detect.

[gzarkadas]

AFAIK you may specify any sort of license you like. It's all good and well. Just be aware that after posting it on a publicly avalible forum you can't claim trade secret status etc. :p Though I don't see how usefull licensing small code snippits is generally going to be. They are generally small and trivial pieces of code that someone else could easily derive in isolation most times. So how do you tell if someone violated the license. for a full aplication etc it is generally easier to detect.
I don't make my living from selling software, so I don't care for trade secret status; I wouldn't using GPL if I was in that direction :D. Even if someday in the future I decide to sell software I will still use GPL, so I do not worry about specifying it.

I see making this declaration merely as a general-purpose defensive measure in order to be able to legally use and make publicly available derivative works based on my code at any time in the future. Releasing it just as 'public domain' is putting it unguarded in an open field; the more aggresive takes it all.

Anyway, it is important at the project I am focusing at the moment, since it is a library of script functions. Such things are like a wall: a collection of many small bricks put together to form something. I don't want to 'loose' any brick, since the time I have available for building is limited :).