Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!unix.cis.pitt.edu!ejkst From: ejkst@unix.cis.pitt.edu (Eric J. Kennedy) Newsgroups: news.groups Subject: Re: comp.sys.amiga.questions Message-ID: <21379@unix.cis.pitt.edu> Date: 4 Jan 90 00:37:11 GMT References: <7049@nigel.udel.EDU> <57b.02t179Uh01@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com> <123.filbo@gorn.santa-cruz.ca.us> <25508@cup.portal.com> <25549@cup.portal.com> <22077@usc.edu> Reply-To: ejkst@unix.cis.pitt.edu (Eric J. Kennedy) Organization: Univ. of Pittsburgh, Comp & Info Services Lines: 24 In article <22077@usc.edu> papa@pollux.usc.edu (Marco Papa) writes: [some interesting stuff on copyrights] Which brings up an interesting point. What is the status of all these programs (and there are *lots*) that come with a notice something like this: FooBar is copyright 1990 John Doe. FooBar is in the PUBLIC DOMAIN!!!!! or FooBar is in the PUBLIC DOMAIN!!! It may not be sold!!!! What, do we flip a coin and take our pick? Do we assume the copyright is valid in #1 even though it expressly says 'public domain'? I could see that. Do we assume that there is an implied copyright on #2 even though it doesn't say 'copyright' and does say 'public domain'? That's going a little far, in my opinion. Do we confiscate the keyboard of the offending programmer until he attends law school? :-) -- Eric Kennedy ejkst@cis.unix.pitt.edu