Please add "Public Domain" to "license" list

[John Cowan]

Rick Moen scripsit:

> To repeat:  I see nothing in 17 USC that permits destruction of
> extant copyright title.  

Quite right.  But it is a property right, and in general any sort of property
right can be abandoned either with words or with the appropriate actions.
(E.g. you have no property rights in your trash after you have put it in
the bin, and anyone may search it and use the contents as they wish.)

IANAL, TINLA.

> I suppose the OSI could put a note on http://www.opensource.org/licenses/ 
> saying "By the way, software you receive in source code form, with or
> without documentation, that you determine was created by USA Federal
> employees in the scope of their employment is also open source (at
> least, it is under USA law), even though there's no actual licence
> statement that documents this."  

Presumably Augusta Lovelace's programs for the Analytical Engine are 
Open Source too.  (Are they in print or on the Net anywhere?)

> I very much doubt it.  But, so far, the OSI's main vehicle has been 
> detailing licences that, when applied as envisioned, produce open-source
> software.  When the USA Federal government produces software and the
> source code becomes available, that is very arguably open source, but
> there's no licence for the OSI's approval process, is there?  ;->

The question is, can you use "OSI Certified" on public domain software?
There is a risk that the software is not really in the public domain,
but then there's a risk that your Open Source word processor is really
a cracked version of Microsoft's.

-- 
John Cowan   jcowan at reutershealth.com  http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
Most languages are dramatically underdescribed, and at least one is 
dramatically overdescribed.  Still other languages are simultaneously 
overdescribed and underdescribed.  Welsh pertains to the third category.
     
--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3