Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
On 3/11/07, John Summerfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$ head -5 >> /usr/share/doc/gettext-devel-0.14.6/examples/hello-java-awt/Hello.java >> // Example for use of GNU gettext. >> // Copyright (C) 2003 Free Software Foundation, Inc. >> // This file is in the public domain. > > > It appears lots of files in the gettext package have this bizarre > comment. According to the FSF, something being "in the public domain" > means "the material is not copyrighted and no license is needed" to > use it. You'll probably need to bring it up with the FSF. It is
One can combine code that is in the public domain and bundle it together with copyright items. Alice in Wonderland is in the public domain. Taking a paragraph from Alice in Wonderland into a GPL program does not mean that program is automatically public domain or vice versa that the text is GPL'd. The combined work is under the GPL, but the individual paragraph is still under the public domain. Clear as mud? Well thats why people go to law school for 5-10 years.. because dealing with things like this are not easy.
But the question is whether that particular file is in the public domain, or whether it's copyright. It contains statements of both, and I don't see how they could "be read together" as they are simply mutually exclusive. Unless my lawyer is prepared to assert otherwise and indemnify me.
If the file didn't have a copyright claim in it, I'd have no worries at all about the public domain statement. But it does have a cpyright statement, and that statement does not give Red Hat any right at all to distribute it.
-- Cheers John -- spambait [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please do not reply off-list _______________________________________________ rhelv5-beta-list mailing list rhelv5-beta-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhelv5-beta-list
