@raphael depends on the mood/project/context/purpose. The ones I used the most are AGPL, BSD-3, FAL/LAL, PPL, GPL, WTFPL, and few of my own brew. Sometimes I also use an anticopyright statement in place of a license, sometimes I also use the pseudo license CC0.
@moparisthebest @raphael yes the Google link says it all :)
Personally I used it for this project https://monoskop.org/Naked_on_Pluto
It was all server side stuff so it made sense, it was also an opportunity to give a bit of visibility for this license at the time.
Given how the distinction between local vs remote execution of code has became increasingly blurry, I agree with @moparisthebest in the sense that if you are looking for a strong copyleft license—because this is really the mechanism you want to promote—then it makes complete sense to default to AGPL even for stuff that may appear at first out of scope.
@raphael @320x200 @moparisthebest For most #OSP works, we double licence it with Art Libre + CC BY-SA (they are compatible), as attemp to promote the first, and make the message more clear for our mainstream contacts with the second. We are interested in CC4R but let's wait the development of it - https://gitlab.constantvzw.org/unbound/cc4r And for fonts, OFL currently, enve if observing the myriad of other "arrangments".
Welcome to post.lurk.org, an instance for discussions around cultural freedom, experimental, new media art, net and computational culture, and things like that.