🇳🇱
I want to create the "Everyone open-source license that ever has existed and ever will exist" license... By using the license you agree to simultaneously release your code under all licenses that have ever and will ever be written that satisfies the definition of a FOSS/FLOSS license.
Flame Wars engage!
how's that different from using the most lax permissive licenses among them?
that's not the way dual- or multi-licensing works. I realize that's not exactly what's being suggested, but I'm still having trouble understanding how this could possibly work.
either (a) the recipients get to choose whichever licenses they wish from the set, in which case this is no different from dual licensing and effectively equivalent to going CC0/WPDD/WTFYW (that are presumably contained in the set), (b) recipients accept a single license that encompasses all of the licenses, i.e., all of the permissions and applicable conditions and requirements, but further constrained in some way (e.g. some copyleft-like property that requires passing on all the bundle to downstream recipients) that would render itself incompatible with strong copylefts that do not allow any such further requirements
either (a) the recipients get to choose whichever licenses they wish from the set, in which case this is no different from dual licensing and effectively equivalent to going CC0/WPDD/WTFYW (that are presumably contained in the set), (b) recipients accept a single license that encompasses all of the licenses, i.e., all of the permissions and applicable conditions and requirements, but further constrained in some way (e.g. some copyleft-like property that requires passing on all the bundle to downstream recipients) that would render itself incompatible with strong copylefts that do not allow any such further requirements
so, not dual licensing, it's more like something totally different, that I also mentioned and that also doesn't work, say a license with additional restrictions on top of those of copyleft licenses? or is it something else?
