[Bf-committers] Re: copyright and suzanne

Douglas Toltzman doug at oakstreetsoftware.com
Wed Dec 15 17:51:29 CET 2004


I promised not to comment further.  I didn't mean to say the the GPL was
equivalent to public domain, although that is, apparently what I wrote.
Due to the complexity of copyright law and the body of common law on which
many decisions are based, this discussion could go on for days.  I'm
simply going to back out here and accept whatever summary judgement you
may make regarding the relevant facts or the validity of my experience.  I
do think, however, that the following section of law applies to suzanne.
For those who might be interested.

http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap13.html

On Wed, 15 Dec 2004, GSR - FR wrote:

> doug at oakstreetsoftware.com (2004-12-15 at 1000.13 -0500):
> > do not think the topic merits any anxiety.  By placing something into the
> > public domain (by including it in a GPL'd program), one had made it next
> 
> GPL is not Public Domain. And saying that, I start to doubt about the
> rest of yoru mail. For example, the vigilant part. I always have heard
> that if you do not defend a Trade Mark, you lose it. But with
> Copyright, I also have heard that you can select when you defend it,
> and waiting years does not make you lose it. But one thing I am sure
> about, GPL code is fully copyrighted with conditions. Which if not
> followed, become null and thus the code if fully copyrighted and get
> ready for infringement lawsuits... which is the trick of the GPL. So
> far from PD.
> 
> GSR



More information about the Bf-committers mailing list