On Monday 03 April 2006 14:32, Jason Dagit wrote: > On 4/3/06, Patrick McFarland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The King James Bible, while almost insulting to bibles by calling it a > > bible, is not copyrighted and is a public domain work. > > Right, which is why I thought it was weird to copyright a derivative > of it. Again, I'm not a lawyer, perhaps that sort of thing is just > fine.
Oh, it is. Its actually not weird at all. You have to copyright a work to apply a license to it; also, public domain works can be turned around and re-copyrighted as apart of a new work. So, if he wants to ensure his new bible remains free, then he has to copyright it so he can Creative Commons it. -- Patrick "Diablo-D3" McFarland || [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Computer games don't affect kids; I mean if Pac-Man affected us as kids, we'd all be running around in darkened rooms, munching magic pills and listening to repetitive electronic music." -- Kristian Wilson, Nintendo, Inc, 1989 _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://www.abridgegame.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
