+---[ Crist J. Clark ]--
|
| As an analogy, take the example of BSD-licensed code where someone
| else owns the copyright (like anything in FreeBSD). Provided I follow
| the limited restrictions of the BSD-license, I can pile additional
| licensing terms on top of that. I
On Thu, Aug 23, 2001 at 09:50:27AM +1000, Andrew Kenneth Milton wrote:
> I guess we can summarize now? :-)
>
> 1) If you are the author of software, it's a bad idea to simply release code
>into the Public Domain, mainly because you can't protect your self from
>litigation by placing discl
I guess we can summarize now? :-)
1) If you are the author of software, it's a bad idea to simply release code
into the Public Domain, mainly because you can't protect your self from
litigation by placing disclaimers in your code.
2) Public Domain means you relinquish your copyright contro
+---[ Giorgos Keramidas ]--
|
| Yep. True. The only problem is that if Charles Mott makes changes at
| a later date to his codebase, changes cannot be merged to the FreeBSD
| version without permission from him, even if the patches apply cleanly
| and break nothing that F
:Yes, and no. Distributing the exact same sources (with an extra
:copyright part) that says somebody should not copy and distribute it,
:as if it were in the public domain, a few weeks after is probably
:fraud. Arguments like "but I put extra work in this second
:distribution, since I made this
From: Crist J. Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Copyright Contradiction in libalias
Date: Tue, Aug 21, 2001 at 04:29:13PM -0700
> On Tue, Aug 21, 2001 at 04:46:07PM -0600, Nate Williams wrote:
>
> > However, I can't retroactively take away the rights of anyone who ha
From: Warner Losh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Copyright Contradiction in libalias
Date: Wed, Aug 22, 2001 at 12:24:56AM -0600
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Nate Williams writes:
> : >
> : > Once it's in the Public Domain you have abandoned your clai
> : On that released version, yes. But, not on subsuquent versions. I
> : still maintain my rights to do with the code as I please.
>
> Then you are creating a new work, based on the public domain work that
> went before it.
I think we're splitting hairs here. Ultimately, the exact same behav
On Wed, 22 Aug 2001, Garrett Wollman wrote:
> < said:
>
> > I mean common part of international copyright law.
>
> There is no such thing as ``international copyright law''. There is
> only national copyright law. Parties to the various international
> copyright conventions agree to harmoni
< said:
> I mean common part of international copyright law.
There is no such thing as ``international copyright law''. There is
only national copyright law. Parties to the various international
copyright conventions agree to harmonize their national law to meet a
particular standard of protec
On Wed, Aug 22, 2001 at 11:48:52 -0400, Garrett Wollman wrote:
> < said:
>
> > No, "author" part of copyright can't be deattached, unless fraud happens.
>
> Only if you live in a country whose legal system recognizes ``moral
> rights''.
I mean common part of international copyright law. F.e. Sh
< said:
> No, "author" part of copyright can't be deattached, unless fraud happens.
Only if you live in a country whose legal system recognizes ``moral
rights''.
-GAWollman
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Andrew Kenneth Milton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Once it's in the Public Domain you have abandoned your claim to copyright.
Actually, that is not possible, at least in some countries
(including Germany, for example).
If you're the author of some piece of software, you're the
holder of the "Ur
On Wed, Aug 22, 2001 at 09:23:58 +1000, Andrew Kenneth Milton wrote:
>
> Once it's in the Public Domain you have abandoned your claim to copyright.
> That is the point of the Public Domain. If you still wish to retain the
> copyright and the associated rights you cannot release it into the Public
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Nate Williams writes:
: > | > If you ever claimed to hold the copyright to software that has been
: > | > released into the public domain, you would be commiting fraud.
: > |
: > | Not if I'm the author of the software.
: > |
: > | I can release my software under a
In message <006e01c12a43$48f9cb30$[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "Thomas T. Veldhouse" writes:
: Copyright is certainly not abaondoned when you place something in the public
: domain. Your rights vary depending upon the license you choose, but you
: certainly do NOT lose your copyright. If you are the autho
+---[ Nate Williams ]--
| > | > If you ever claimed to hold the copyright to software that has been
| > | > released into the public domain, you would be commiting fraud.
| > |
| > | Not if I'm the author of the software.
| > |
| > | I can release my software under as man
> | > If you ever claimed to hold the copyright to software that has been
> | > released into the public domain, you would be commiting fraud.
> |
> | Not if I'm the author of the software.
> |
> | I can release my software under as many licenses as I'd like, including
> | putting it into the pu
On Tue, Aug 21, 2001 at 04:46:07PM -0600, Nate Williams wrote:
> > If you ever claimed to hold the copyright to software that has been
> > released into the public domain, you would be commiting fraud.
>
> Not if I'm the author of the software.
>
> I can release my software under as many license
+---[ Nate Williams ]--
| > If you ever claimed to hold the copyright to software that has been
| > released into the public domain, you would be commiting fraud.
|
| Not if I'm the author of the software.
|
| I can release my software under as many licenses as I'd like,
> If you ever claimed to hold the copyright to software that has been
> released into the public domain, you would be commiting fraud.
Not if I'm the author of the software.
I can release my software under as many licenses as I'd like, including
putting it into the public domain.
However, I can
On Tue, Aug 21, 2001 at 11:18:41PM +0300, Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
> From: Crist J. Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: Copyright Contradiction in libalias
> Date: Tue, Aug 21, 2001 at 11:40:20AM -0700
>
> > On Tue, Aug 21, 2001 at 08:14:59AM -0500, Thomas T. Veldho
From: Crist J. Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Copyright Contradiction in libalias
Date: Tue, Aug 21, 2001 at 11:40:20AM -0700
> On Tue, Aug 21, 2001 at 08:14:59AM -0500, Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:
>
> > So, if Microsoft
> > decides they want your software with
On Tue, Aug 21, 2001 at 08:14:59AM -0500, Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:
>
> >
> > Well since copyright was abandoned (being placed into the public domain is
> > abandonment of copyright), the changed file can be copyrighted by whomever
> > makes changes. The new file is then covered by the license f
>
> Well since copyright was abandoned (being placed into the public domain is
> abandonment of copyright), the changed file can be copyrighted by whomever
> makes changes. The new file is then covered by the license from that point
> forward.
>
Copyright is certainly not abaondoned when you pla
On Mon, 20 Aug 2001, Crist J. Clark wrote:
>It is now written policy, and I
>believe it was the understood, unwritten policy in the past, that any
>patches and additions to a file in FreeBSD are governed by the
>existing licensing of the file unless otherwise stated. This would
>indicate to me th
On Tue, Aug 21, 2001 at 02:10:42AM +0100, Brian Somers wrote:
> > +---[ Brian Somers ]--
> > | > Check with Charles to see if he really wants to abandon copyright claims
> > | > to his code, or whether he was really implying some really liberal open source
> > | > license.
> +---[ Brian Somers ]--
> | > Check with Charles to see if he really wants to abandon copyright claims
> | > to his code, or whether he was really implying some really liberal open source
> | > license.
> |
> | With the BSD Copyright (only) he keeps the intellectual copy
+---[ Brian Somers ]--
| > Check with Charles to see if he really wants to abandon copyright claims
| > to his code, or whether he was really implying some really liberal open source
| > license.
|
| With the BSD Copyright (only) he keeps the intellectual copyright on
|
> Check with Charles to see if he really wants to abandon copyright claims
> to his code, or whether he was really implying some really liberal open source
> license.
With the BSD Copyright (only) he keeps the intellectual copyright on
the original. That's what I've changed it to (as per his a
+---[ Brian Somers ]--
| This is my fault. Charles gave me permission to change these files
| to a BSD license a while ago. It looks like I got it wrong :-/
|
| I'll fix it now.
Well since copyright was abandoned (being placed into the public domain is
abandonment of c
This is my fault. Charles gave me permission to change these files
to a BSD license a while ago. It looks like I got it wrong :-/
I'll fix it now.
> I was doing some things in libalias when something caught my eye,
>
> $ cat alias.c
> /* -*- mode: c; tab-width: 8; c-basic-indent: 4; -*-
I was doing some things in libalias when something caught my eye,
$ cat alias.c
/* -*- mode: c; tab-width: 8; c-basic-indent: 4; -*- */
/*-
* Copyright (c) 2001 Charles Mott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* All rights reserved.
*
[snip usual BSD licence legalese and comments about the cod
33 matches
Mail list logo
