I believe that the OSI is not USA only, so I hope this question does
receive some discussion.
On Mon, 16 Feb 2004, Russell Nelson wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So Americans can ignore the civil-servant version of the NOSA license with
impunity, but not so Australians.
Interesting
Russell McOrmond wrote:
On Mon, 16 Feb 2004, Russell Nelson wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So Americans can ignore the civil-servant version of the NOSA license with
impunity, but not so Australians.
[This was in response to my quoting from the Berne Convention to
show that copyright
Russell McOrmond scripsit:
It appears that with US government created works that every US
citizen has the right to apply licenses to the work,
Not so. See my other posting.
Given that term expiry is not the only way for a work to
enter the public domain, and term expiry can be different
I do not have an answer to the specific question, but I suspect the answer
may reside in a treaty or an international agreement that is not a treaty.
The Uruguay Round Agreements Act (URAA), for instance, allows works in the
public domain in the U.S. to be scooped out of the public domain
Russell McOrmond scripsit:
If NASA has the ability to apply a license in a foreign country to a
works that is in the public domain in the USA, then does not any other US
citizen have the ability to apply a license as well? If these other US
citizens do not, then does NASA?
Why, because
Russell McOrmond scripsit:
If NASA has the ability to apply a license in a foreign country to a
works that is in the public domain in the USA, then does not any other US
citizen have the ability to apply a license as well? If these other US
citizens do not, then does NASA?
6 matches
Mail list logo
