That's not true. If you have a signed piece of paper saying I wrote it
in mm-dd- you are good to go. The same way patents work; prior art
can be proven by writing your idea in an engineering notebook (you know,
pen and paper!) and then signing it. Since those notebooks are usually
in
Well if you prove that you wrote it then that would defeat the purpose
of releasing it under the name of anonmyous would you?
One would be violating the copyright law regardless what name the said
code is released under right? I mean, a third party won't be able to
claim that they are the
I didn't claim it was a good idea.
Anyway, this is all theoretical.
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 11:36:11PM +1000, Sunnz wrote:
Well if you prove that you wrote it then that would defeat the purpose
of releasing it under the name of anonmyous would you?
One would be violating the copyright law
On 2008-06-23, Sunnz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well if you prove that you wrote it then that would defeat the purpose
of releasing it under the name of anonmyous would you?
Someone may want to intentionally release it anonymously, then
go back and try and sue people for infringing their
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 08:45:59AM -0500, Marco Peereboom wrote:
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 11:36:11PM +1000, Sunnz wrote:
Well if you prove that you wrote it then that would defeat the purpose
of releasing it under the name of anonmyous would you?
One would be violating the copyright law
On 6/22/08, Sunnz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi, just wondering what's your opinion on this...
Looking back, I realized the subject question is not the same as the
body question and nobody has answered it. For OpenBSD, the answer is
no, you cannot contribute anonymously.
If one were to release
Hi, just wondering what's your opinion on this...
If one were to release some code under an ISC or BSD-like 2 clause
license, but under the name of anonymous, would it effectively as if
it was released as public domain?
I guess the actually question you wanted to as was:
Does OpenBSD
2008/6/24 Theo de Raadt [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hi, just wondering what's your opinion on this...
If one were to release some code under an ISC or BSD-like 2 clause
license, but under the name of anonymous, would it effectively as if
it was released as public domain?
I guess the actually
Sunnz wrote:
2008/6/24 Theo de Raadt [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hi, just wondering what's your opinion on this...
If one were to release some code under an ISC or BSD-like 2 clause
license, but under the name of anonymous, would it effectively as if
it was released as public domain?
I guess
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 04:01:57PM -0700, Predrag Punosevac wrote:
The demise of his qmail is a wonderful example of interesting project which
died because of the bad licence. I know that lots of people here like his
djbdns but just imagine what could have happened with his projects if they
IANAL...
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 03:43:09AM +1000, Sunnz wrote:
| Hi, just wondering what's your opinion on this...
|
| If one were to release some code under an ISC or BSD-like 2 clause
| license, but under the name of anonymous, would it effectively as if
| it was released as public domain?
My guess would be that the content is released into the public domain
since you can't sue because there is no proof that you are the
copyright holder.
Comrade RIngo Kamens
On Sun, Jun 22, 2008 at 3:47 PM, Paul de Weerd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
IANAL...
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 03:43:09AM +1000,
On Sun, Jun 22, 2008 at 04:18:33PM -0400, Ringo Kamens wrote:
| That wouldn't work because the original author would be able to prove
| he was the owner of the copyright.
And that isn't possible in the hypothetical situation posted by the
OP ?
Cheers,
Paul 'WEiRD' de Weerd
--
On Sun, Jun 22, 2008 at 04:09:37PM -0400, Ringo Kamens wrote:
| My guess would be that the content is released into the public domain
| since you can't sue because there is no proof that you are the
| copyright holder.
| Comrade RIngo Kamens
Let me just steal some code somewhere, relicense it and
That wouldn't work because the original author would be able to prove
he was the owner of the copyright.
Comrade RIngo Kamens
On Sun, Jun 22, 2008 at 4:16 PM, Paul de Weerd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Jun 22, 2008 at 04:09:37PM -0400, Ringo Kamens wrote:
| My guess would be that the content
On 6/22/08, Ringo Kamens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My guess would be that the content is released into the public domain
since you can't sue because there is no proof that you are the
copyright holder.
He absolutely can sue. He says I don't know who this anonymous
person is, but they copied
Sorry, I should have been more clear in my statement. What I was
saying is that if the original author of the work published it
anonymously, he would not be able to sue because he would not be able
to prove he was the original author and copyright holder of the work.
Comrade Ringo Kamens
On Sun,
On Sun, Jun 22, 2008 at 05:18:51PM -0400, Ringo Kamens wrote:
| Sorry, I should have been more clear in my statement. What I was
| saying is that if the original author of the work published it
| anonymously, he would not be able to sue because he would not be able
| to prove he was the original
Said individual would have to be able to prove he originally made the
content available. I guess this could theoretically be possible ie if
server logs verify it or something along those lines. Things to
consider:
1. If said individual posted code anonymously, wouldn't that indicate
they would
19 matches
Mail list logo
