> -----Original Message----- > From: License-discuss [mailto:license-discuss-boun...@opensource.org] On > Behalf Of John Cowan > Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2016 11:39 AM > To: license-discuss@opensource.org > Subject: Re: [License-discuss] [Non-DoD Source] Re: US Army Research > Laboratory Open Source License proposal > > Karan, Cem F CIV USARMY RDECOM ARL (US) scripsit: > > > A copyright-based license may work outside of the US because the USG > > would (probably) have copyright protections there? > > Depending solely on local law, so there is no uniform answer.
Yes, which is why I said 'may'. It has to be litigated in each jurisdiction to know for certain how it will go. > > As far as I know, this hasn't been litigated anywhere, so it may not > > apply. > > That wouldn't matter if there was an explicit or implicit statutory grant in > the foreign country. If only the Berne Convention holds, then > the "We give you 0 years because you give yourself 0 years" argument kicks > in. I see what you're saying, and it's an interesting point of view. Are there any countries that are signatories to the Berne Convention that hold this point of view? > > Interesting link! I wish it weren't behind a paywall, I'd like to > > read more of it. > > Me too. Ask a lawyer friend to send you a copy (and me, while you're at > it). > My father's preprint copy moldered away a long time ago. What, and violate copyright, the very thing we're discussing right now? ;) Thanks, Cem Karan
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@opensource.org https://lists.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
