[retroforth] Re: Copyright law and the public domain
- From: docl@xxxxxxxxxxx
- To: retroforth@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 19:54:14 -0500
On Tue, Jan 24, 2006 at 07:04:46PM -0500, Charles Childers wrote:
> I'd like to thank everyone who's commented so far. I've revised my
> initial statement to better reflect what I want for the software:
>
>
> The authors of this software dedicate their work to the
> public domain.
>
> We recognize that many countries around the world do not
> recognize a direct dedication to the public domain in
> their copyright laws. For this reason, we also grant
> unconditional, non-revocable permission to anyone who
> obtains a copy of this software to use, modify, and to
> redistribute it without limitation.
>
>
> Based on my continued reading of US law, it should be legal and is a
> bit clearer than my prior statement in my opinion.
I agree, this is clearer and better. It shouldn't confuse either
the "normal" reader, or the lawyers of the world. It doesn't depend
on "public domain" being defined or recognised in law, but does not
exempt it from being real and applying either. The redundancy of
having to say it twice should make countries that fail to recognise
the public domain feel a bit silly, IMO.
If the legal minds of the free software community approve this or a
similar statement, perhaps it will help overcome people's fear of
calling their software "public domain" and extend/protect the
branch of the community that is purely and intentionally public
domain.
Good work, Charles.
Other related posts:
