Can abandonment be irrevocable?

[Peter Fairbrother]

Rick Moen wrote:

> Quoting Peter Fairbrother (zenadsl6186 at zen.co.uk):
> 
>> I totally agree with both of you - I'm trying to convince some people,
>> including DJ Bernstein, _not_ to use abandonment, but to use a 2-clause BSD
>> licence instead.
> 
> In the case of Prof. Bernstein, he's made very clear that he simply
> doesn't like explicit licence statements and is disinclined to use them,
> so you might as well give up trying.  (There's no rational reason why
> someone in the indicated circumstances wouldn't find 2-clause BSD
> amenable.)

I suppose that that's up to him; and I'd applaud his efforts to expand
licencing concepts, if that's what they are - but he's advising some ok+
crypto coders to use abandonment, and I wouldn't like them to come to grief.
Or me.

Considering his reputation (and ability) in that field, then he might be
able to influence people to use abandonment in order to "free" code, though
the difference between abandonment and "putting into the public domain"
might not be apparent to them, and some are regarding those as being the
same. 

And most important of all, I don't know if, or how, I (I'm the m-o-o-t guy)
can use such code. 

What happens to code, or the copyright in it, when it is "abandoned"?


>> This wouldn't matter to me at all, except that some good code is being
>> "abandoned"; and I don't know if I can use it.
> 
> I think your caution is reasonable,

Is it more than just caution, is there a risk involved in using such code?
Can anyone delimit that risk?

> and applaud your attempt to help.

Not entirely an attempt to help, it's at least partly self-interest - and
probably useless in the immediate sense if "DJB" is opposed, assuming he's
wrong - but any authoritative analysis of the questions raised in my/ Dan's
emails might help. 

Is he wrong? Am I?  Can abandonment be irrevocable?


-- 
Peter Fairbrother

--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3