On Friday 02 July 2010 22:55:27 narendra sisodiya wrote: > > I don't think the app can be both GPL and in public domain. but then > > INAL. > > As per my knowledge, I may be wrong,
you are wrong > If something is "not copyrighted" then it becomes public domain. the moment you publish anything, you automatically get copyright of it whether you like it or not, or mention it or not > License > comes into action when somebody has full rights (ie copyrights) and he want > to give some limited freedom to enjoy some software under some terms and > conditions. (ie license). If somebody do not include any license then it > means he is not permitting anything. If somebody is not including copyright > then it means it means that software is public domain. license comes when he either gives limited freedom (as in GPL) or full freedom (as in BSD). In both cases he retains the copyright - the license will not transfer the copyright. If someone does not include copyright, he still has copyright and it does not mean the software is public domain. > As KG said, in Indian Law, we must tell that some page/software is under > public domain. correct > If somebody is not including copyright notice then it is not > under private domain, nor it is under public domain then where it will > fall? > private domain - whether he says so or not he has copyright and if he does not specify a license it means he has not licensed you to use it. -- Regards Kenneth Gonsalves Senior Associate NRC-FOSS at AU-KBC -- http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
