The different between GPL and non-license

[kmself at ix.netcom.com]

On Mon, Aug 07, 2000 at 12:37:29PM +0700, Kristiono Setyadi wrote:
> I want to ask about the different between GPL with non-license.
> I think that GPL and non-license is the same.
> Both of them are distribute to anyone.
> Is my opinion true or false?
> Thank you.

If you mean the distinction between the GNU GPL and public domain, no
they aren't the same.

Any license in which copyright is retained reserves rights to the
author.  Placing a work in the public domain releases virtually all
rights of authorship (excepting possibly "moral rights" depending on
jurisdiction).

The GPL allows broad lattitude in use of code, but imposes restrictions.
There are few if any restrictions on use of public domain works.

-- 
Karsten M. Self <kmself at ix.netcom.com>     http://www.netcom.com/~kmself
 Evangelist, Opensales, Inc.                    http://www.opensales.org
  What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand?   Debian GNU/Linux rocks!
   http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/    K5: http://www.kuro5hin.org
GPG fingerprint: F932 8B25 5FDD 2528 D595 DC61 3847 889F 55F2 B9B0
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 232 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20000807/1200f03a/attachment.sig>