 license-free software is computer software that is not explicitly in the public domain, but the copyright owner has not made explicit the terms of the license. == examples == well known examples of license-free software formerly included programs written by daniel j. bernstein, specifically qmail, djbdns, daemontools, and ucspi-tcp. bernstein previously held the copyright and distributed these works, but he placed them in the public domain on december 28, 2007. additionally, small scripts are frequently released without specifying a license. for example, the website userscripts.org hosts more than 52,000 greasemonkey user scripts, the majority of which have no specified license. == rights for users == on his software users' rights web page, bernstein explains his belief that under the terms of copyright law itself software users are always allowed to modify software for their own personal use, regardless of license agreements. he says "if you think you need a license from the copyright holder, you've been bamboozled by microsoft. as long as you're not distributing the software, you have nothing to worry about."software users' rights he also says that software users are allowed to back up, to compile, and to run the software that they possess. he further says that "since it's not copyright infringement for you to apply a patch, it's also not copyright infringement for someone to give you a patch," noting the case of galoob v. nintendo as precedent. thus modified versions of license-free software can legally be distributed in source code form in whatever way that the original can, by distributing a patch alongside it. although they come without a license document, it can be argued that such programs are legally bound by a license. for example, on his various web pages giving information for distributors, bernstein granted permission for users to redistribute the packages, in source code form, verbatim. this permission granted by the copyright holder can be construed as a copyright license. however, there is significant and long standing dispute in the community as to its validity and weight{{citation needed
Software_licenses