[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Boilerplate License Revision Proposal
On Sat, Jul 29, 2000 at 01:49:34PM -0400, Robert Kiesling wrote:
> Apologies also for the U.S. centrism, but works that are published
> here are implicitly copyrighted. I'm not sure what the laws are in
> other countries. That is, works written in the U.S. (whatever that
> means) do not need to contain an explicit copyright notice in order to
The same since the Berne convention.
> commercial publication, it seems to me 1completely irrelevant,
> presumptuous, unethical, and perhaps even illegal, that a
> non-publishing trade group should specify or even recommend the
> license terms that a document should carry.
Then we don't have to host the document.
We should take care of the license problems because of the problems we
have.
--
Guylhem P. Aznar http://www.linuxdoc.org
guylhem \@/ metalab.unc.edu http://www.iMedecin.com
"They who can give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary
safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." ----- Benjamin Franklin
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]