[Moving this back over to license-discuss where it _still_ belongs, thank you.]
Quoting Lawrence Rosen (lro...@rosenlaw.com): > [paring the distribution list] Previously CC'd to Basingstoke and back, I wouldn't doubt. > Thank you, Alexander, for a clear rejoinder to my essay arguing that the > public domain is not effective. The case you referenced in your email, > Hampton v. Paramount Pictures, 279 F.2d 100 (9th Cir. Cal. 1960), stands for > the proposition that, at least in the Ninth Circuit, a person can indeed > abandon his copyrights (counter to what I wrote in my article) -- but it > takes the equivalent of a manifest license to do so. :-) The Terekhov person was quoting Prof. Bernstein? ;-> How very droll. Bernstein is of course one of the primary people propagating the aforementioned hapless confusion between property abandonment and public domain. I made a point of creating an entire section of my page about PD-dedication attempts to clearing up confusion created by Dan's page -- and pointing out his non-sequitur arguments claiming that you specifically were misinformed, attributing to you positions you don't hold and never articulated, etc. _______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@opensource.org http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
