Choose the project license for the public launch

[eimexdev]

Part of OpenBeat v0.1.0 public launch map.

Question

Which open-source license should OpenBeat use for its source and public release, given the maintainer's reuse goals, the open-source ethos of the project, source provenance, and bundled dependency obligations?

Resolution should record

• Whether the project should be permissive or copyleft.
• The selected SPDX license and the reason it fits.
• Any provenance concern or third-party obligation the implementation must preserve.
• The exact public claims the selected license permits.

This is a HITL decision: use $grilling and $domain-modeling, and let the maintainer speak for the project's values.

Handoff

Apply the selected project license and align public metadata implements the resolved decision.

[eimexdev]

Resolution

OpenBeat will be released under the MIT License (MIT).

• License posture: Permissive. People may use, copy, modify, distribute, sublicense, and sell OpenBeat, including in closed-source or commercial products, provided they preserve the MIT copyright and permission notice.
• Copyright notice: Copyright © 2026 Parker Eimerl
• Why it fits: The maintainer prioritizes straightforward community adoption and broad reuse over requiring downstream modifications to remain open. MIT expresses that intent with a small, familiar set of obligations and an explicit warranty/liability disclaimer.
• Source provenance: The maintainer confirms that the OpenBeat source was created by Parker Eimerl (including work produced through Parker's coding tools) and was not copied or adapted from another person or project. Historical SwiftHustle and eimexdev author identities belong to the maintainer; T3 Code identifies a coding tool, not a separate human rights-holder.
• Third-party obligations: MIT covers OpenBeat's own source only. The bundled Python runtime and dependencies retain their respective licenses, copyright notices, and any required attribution/notice files. The release implementation must inventory and preserve those materials; it must not imply that all bundled code is MIT-licensed.
• Permitted public claims: OpenBeat may be described as “open source,” “MIT-licensed,” “free to use, modify, and redistribute,” and usable in commercial or closed-source projects subject to the MIT notice requirement. It should not be described as public domain, obligation-free, warranty-backed, officially affiliated with DaVinci Resolve/Blackmagic Design, or wholly MIT-licensed when referring to the complete installer bundle.

Implementation is handed off to Apply the selected project license and align public metadata.