BIP39: add license and copyright section #1680

1. 
   jonatack commented at 4:56 pm on October 8, 2024: member

   These are required for legal use, and also per BIP-2, and they avoid user confusion as seen in #1395 (comment).

   Choice of MIT license per BIP author feedback in #1395 (comment).

   The license omission was likely an oversight.

   BIP-39 predates BIP-2 by 2-3 years. BIP-1 (in force at the time, since superseded by BIP-2) did require a copyright or public domain section.

2. BIP39: add license and copyright section

   These are required per BIP-2, and they avoid user confusion as seen in
   
   https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/1395#issuecomment-2393915807

   541b6c4db4
3. 
   jonatack commented at 4:59 pm on October 8, 2024: member

   cc @prusnak for approval
4. jonatack added the label Proposed BIP modification on Oct 8, 2024
5. 
   prusnak commented at 5:14 pm on October 8, 2024: contributor

   ACK
6. 
   murchandamus commented at 5:54 pm on October 8, 2024: contributor

   Concept ACK, but for a license change, I expect that we need all rights holders to agree. cc: @slush0, @ebfull, @voisine
7. 
   kanzure commented at 7:13 pm on October 8, 2024: contributor

   is licensing and CLAs addressed in the new bip2 @murchandamus ?
8. 
   slush0 commented at 7:21 pm on October 8, 2024: contributor

   ACK MIT
9. 
   jonatack commented at 10:21 pm on October 18, 2024: member

   Pinging @ebfull and @voisine for approval here.
10. murchandamus added the label Pending acceptance on Nov 7, 2024
11. 
    murchandamus commented at 8:47 pm on November 12, 2024: contributor

    is licensing and CLAs addressed in the new bip2 @murchandamus ?

    Just in so far as we have always required an “acceptable license” that permitted others to use the work. My new process BIP draft so far does not propose a CLA.

Contributors
jonatack prusnak murchandamus kanzure slush0

Labels
Proposed BIP modification Pending acceptance