rs@mirror.UUCP (02/13/87)
In article <1694@ihuxv.UUCP>, eklhad@ihuxv.UUCP (K. A. Dahlke) writes: > ; Talking console device driver for the AT&T PC6300. > ; Written by Karl Dahlke, September 1986. > ; Property of AT&T Bell Laboratories, all rights reserved. > ; This software is in the public domain and may be freely > ; distributed to anyone, provided this notice is included. > ; It may not, in whole or in part, be incorporated in any commercial > ; product without AT&T's explicit permission. Now, this is a real good study in self-contradiction: "All rights reserved" means people have to ask you before they do anyting other than read it. (Well not quite, but close enough.) "public domain" means you are relinquishing all claims on the software and are letting anyone do anything they want to and with it. "provided this notice is included" means the source is not in the public domain, because you are restricting use. "It may not ... [without] explicit permission" is a direct contradiction of the public domain sentence. There's no copyright marker, which weakens the enforceability of the restricted use. Sure, there's implicit copyright, but if you go to the trouble of reserving rights, you should go to the trouble of putting in a copyright notice. So, the count is one phrase _for_ the public domain, and three counts _against_ it. (Let's call the copyright a wash.) I'd go for the underdog, and consider this public domain code, but then, I don't have a PC6300. Caveat: I just read the new Prentice-Hall book on legal protection of computer software; a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. -- -- Rich $alz "Drug tests p**s me off" Mirror Systems, Cambridge Massachusetts rs@mirror.TMC.COM {adelie, mit-eddie, ihnp4, harvard!wjh12, cca, cbosgd, seismo}!mirror!rs