Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!uflorida!mephisto!bbn.com!cosell From: cosell@bbn.com (Bernie Cosell) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Re: THE MEANING OF 'PUBLIC DOMAIN'...Lets define it!!! Keywords: PD, FREELY DISTRIBUTABLE, LEGAL, COPYRIGHT, Amiga Message-ID: <58265@bbn.BBN.COM> Date: 17 Jul 90 17:34:33 GMT References: <1990Jul14.043408.20134@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> <157@cbmcel.UUCP> Sender: news@bbn.com Lines: 36 Sorry to post this, but I tried email and *none* of the sites in your email part are defined in the usenet maps here: }| Martin S. Stoller, cbmehq!cbmsub!cbmcel!stoller | the only relevant 'cbm' I see in our Index is cbmvax... Nonetheless, pressing on: stoller@cbmcel.UUCP (Martin S. Stoller) writes: }I) WHAT? This is a call to the entire AMIGA PROGRAMMING SOCIETY, }FRED FISH, and Rom Kernal Manual Authors. I wish to start a discussion } (==> NOT A WAR <==) }what 'PUBLIC DOMAIN' EXACTLY and LEGALLY means. I don't believe this has }been done before; if it has, we should check the validity of the definition. I think you have to pick a different term than "Public domain". Public domain is perfectly well defined, and almost no "PD" software is actually public domain at all. Public domain means that anyone can make use of the work for anything they please --- the author has renounced all rights to it [or a prior copyright has expired]. Plain and simple. This means that if your program comes up with "copyright " or has other distribution or usage restrictions, it is **NOT** PD at all, but is rather being distributed under some kind of limited-rights arrangement. Yes, this is an interesting topic, but you haven't made clear what you think the actual goal of the discussion ought to be. Beyond PD, once we agree that "really public domain" is what _very_few_ authors really want, I think you'll find that different authors have very different goals, and so there cannot be "just one" perfect set of distribution rights. /Bernie\