On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 9:34 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It sounds so wonderful to just release software into the public domain. > This is potentially dangerous not only for the creator but the downstream > users > as well. > > Why? > > First of all, there is *no* way to relinquish ownership of copyrights before > the expiration date 90+ years into the future. All you can do is create a > contract/license for your users. > > e.g. > > "I hereby grant this software for anyone to use for any purpose." > > The trojan horse in this "license" is that there is nothing preventing me > from > revoking it after you build a multimillion dollar business based on it. > Yikes! > ***You have to make sure the license says you have those right as long as the > copyright lasts***. > > When someone like SQLite or Qmail projects claim their software is public > domain, that just isn't true. All they can do is craft a license that > effectively *feels* like the real public domain 90-100+ years in the future. > > Think about that before you get warm fuzzies about so called faux "public > domain" works such as SQLite or Qmail. *You must look at the license!*
OK. Can you cite a single example of damage done to a user of "public domain" software by such an action? > Furthermore, the creator is responsible in the slim chance of "harm" being > caused by the released work....unless you explicitly state in a well > developed > open source LICENSE that the work disclaims any warranties. Again can you cite a single example of a creator of "public domain" software being held liable for harm caused by that software. Please be specific. After all it is possible, though statistically unlikely, that all of the air moloecules will be in one corrner of the room at any given instant. The set of outcomes that are possible is so much larger than the set of outcomes that are probable ... at some point one needs tot hink about probabilities else all of one's time will be consumed with the unlikely. > So please, don't think you or anyone is being clever by releasing software in > the public domain. Rather, use a well vetted license like MIT, Apache or GPL > before you accidentaly legally blow your leg off. A much better argument for those licenses is rather like the argument for Open Source itself; why reinvent the wheel? I continue to belive that the risk you speak of is both minimal and hardly worth the time it took me to compose this message. BobLQ "There are more important things to use our brains on." -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
