rcd@ico.ISC.COM (Dick Dunn) (07/29/89)
In article <12361@pur-ee.UUCP>, hankd@pur-ee.UUCP (Hank Dietz) writes: > I'd just like to clarify that public domain (PD) software DOES carry a > copyright... Hank, I'm sorry but you're completely wrong. It doesn't even take a lawyer to check this one; a decent dictionary will tell you that "public domain" means "not subject to copyright or patent". If a work is in the public domain, it may be freely appropriated--the act of placing it in the public domain is equivalent to relinquishing ALL rights in the work. If you put a notice in a piece of software saying that it is in the public domain, but accompanying it with a restriction, you have made conflicting statements. The best you could hope for if someone disobeyed the restric- tion you attempt to place on it is a very murky legal hassle. I suggest that folks who are interested in these issues look at the GNU material talking about "copyleft"--the explanation of why GNU software is not PD covers the issues. There is also a paper by Jordan Breslow - an attorney practicing copyright and computer law - which came with the news software a while back. It does a good job of explaining the distinctions. Regarding PD, he notes that "...the phrase `public domain', when used correctly, means the absence of copyright protection..." > ...This is exactly how research results published in > journals are treated: the text is copyrighted, the authors must be given > due credit for their work, but everyone is free to build upon that work. Yes, the text is copyrighted. It is not in the public domain. Note that a copyright does NOT cover information! It covers the presentation of the information. When you say "everyone is free to build upon that work" you mean that people can use the information--which is true because the copy- right has nothing to do with it. If the research produced a patent as well, others would *not* be [as] free to build upon that work, since they would be unable to use whatever processes were patented without licensing them. > Someone who modifies your PD code shouldn't have any obligation to you other > than to acknowledge, by appropriate citation, your prior work. This is reasonable, but the acknowledgement is a matter of courtesy and honesty. There is no legal obligation. Representing someone else's work as your own would be an entirely different matter, separate from copyright questions. What I mean by that is: If you take a work in the public domain and represent it as your own, you CAN get into trouble, but the trouble is NOT within the domain of copyright law. -- Dick Dunn rcd@ico.isc.com uucp: {ncar,nbires}!ico!rcd (303)449-2870 ...Simpler is better.
davewt@nc386.uucp (David Wright) (08/03/89)
assign them to the public domain. The author also automatically retains "moral rights"; the work cannot be modified without the authors permission, even when he has assigned the copyright elsewhere, unless he has signed a moral rights waiver. Dave
msj@cs.warwick.ac.uk (Mike Joy) (08/03/89)
In which countries does the concept of "public domain" exist in a legal sense, and what is the status of PD software in other countries? --------- msj@cs.warwick.ac.uk ----------- telephone +44 203 523368 ----------- --------- UUCP ...!ukc!warwick!msj ------- fax +44 203 525714 -----------
sc@qmet.UUCP (Steve Croft) (08/06/89)
In article <15965@vail.ICO.ISC.COM>, rcd@ico.ISC.COM (Dick Dunn) writes: > In article <12361@pur-ee.UUCP>, hankd@pur-ee.UUCP (Hank Dietz) writes: > > I'd just like to clarify that public domain (PD) software DOES carry a > > copyright... > > If you put a notice in a piece of software saying that it is in the public > domain, but accompanying it with a restriction, you have made conflicting > statements. The best you could hope for if someone disobeyed the restric- > tion you attempt to place on it is a very murky legal hassle. Actually, there would be no legal hassle (unless the lawyers just wanted to go through the motions :). If you have "Public Domain" associated with your code, then it doesn't matter how many restrictions you place on it... it's still public domain. If you don't want your code to be placed in the public domain, don't even place those words in your licensing info (that may be extreme, but better to play it safe).A Just state your restrictions and let it go at that. steve -- ****************************************************************************** * If what I say is incorrect, * Steve Croft, Qualimetrics, Inc. * * then it's not what I meant! * (uunet!mmsac!qmet!sc) * ******************************************************************************