On 08/14/2012 11:24 AM, Ben Tilly wrote: > Based on http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/6225 and similar > articles, I'd long believed that a declaration that you were > abandoning copyright was a meaningless farce. > > Then by accident today I ran across http://cr.yp.to/publicdomain.html > which claims the opposite, and cites actual court decisions as > evidence. > > Is D. J. Bernstein out of his depth here, or does he have a valid point?
This question is hotly debated, and the answer boils down to the worst sort of "maybe, sortof, kindof". Ask 10 different lawyers, and you'll probably get 10 different answers. (Not to mention that the answer almost certainly changes based on the jurisdiction.) Fedora used to spend a lot of time stressing out over this question, but recently, after counsel with Red Hat Legal, we concluded that if someone is explicitly and clearly abandoning their copyright on a work (as in CC-0, for example), treating that work in good faith as being in the public domain presented a very minimal amount of risk, especially since such a declaration, were it to go to trial, would likely limit the effectiveness of the copyright "holder" suing for infringement. ~tom == Fedora Project _______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@opensource.org http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
