<HTML dir=ltr><HEAD><TITLE>Public domain software is not open-source?</TITLE>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=unicode">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16608" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV id=idOWAReplyText86115 dir=ltr>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial size=2>ESR and Bruce's comments seem FAQ worthy about Public Domain software being Open Source (if the source is in fact available) despite the lack of a license (by definition).</FONT></DIV></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><BR>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
<FONT face=Tahoma size=2><B>From:</B> Alexander Terekhov [mailto:alexander.terekhov@gmail.com]<BR><B>Sent:</B> Sat 3/1/2008 12:39 PM<BR><B>To:</B> License Discuss<BR><B>Subject:</B> Public domain software is not open-source?<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV>
<P><FONT size=2>:-)<BR><BR><A href="http://www.news.com/8301-13580_3-9881858-39.html">http://www.news.com/8301-13580_3-9881858-39.html</A><BR><BR>-----<BR>... OSI lists 68 compliant licenses.<BR><BR>Richard Hipp, who founded the SQLite database project in 2000 as a<BR>public-domain project, believes it does qualify as open-source<BR>software.<BR><BR>"I've had a number of conversations on this topic with corporate<BR>lawyers for companies that are actively using SQLite. The consensus<BR>there seems to be that 'public domain' is valid and is a proper subset<BR>of 'open source'--except in France and Germany where the concept of<BR>'public domain' is not recognized," he told me in an e-mail discussion<BR>prompted by the Adobe story.<BR><BR>But not so fast. Take the view of Mark Radcliffe, the intellectual<BR>property attorney who's general counsel to the Open Source Initiative.<BR><BR>When I asked Radcliffe if public domain software was open-source, he<BR>was clear: "No. Truly public domain software is no longer protected by<BR>copyright, thus it cannot have a license which would impose the terms<BR>necessary to comply with any of the open source licenses," he said.<BR><BR>Agreeing with him is Louis Rosen, an attorney with Rosenlaw and<BR>Einschlag who previously led OSI's legal work and who still is<BR>involved. He directed me to an older but still relevant piece he wrote<BR>about why the public domain isn't a license.<BR><BR>"'Public domain' will never be a license. It actually means 'No<BR>license required,'" Rosen said. "Software that is 'dedicated to the<BR>public' or 'to the public domain' is pretty safe. I just worry a bit<BR>when people or companies give software away in such an amateurish way,<BR>without understanding that licenses or covenants are far more<BR>efficient and effective."<BR>-----<BR><BR>regards,<BR>alexander.<BR><BR>--<BR>"12/21/2007 ORDER TO EXTEND TIME FOR DEFENDANT...<BR> 01/22/2008 ORDER TO EXTEND TIME FOR DEFENDANT...<BR> 02/19/2008 ORDER TO EXTEND TIME FOR DEFENDAT(sic)...<BR> 02/26/2008 ENDORSED LETTER addressed to Judge Laura Taylor Swain from<BR>Daniel B. Ravicher...<BR> 02/27/2008 ORDER that Defendants Verizon Communications, Inc. has<BR>until March 14, 2008..."<BR><BR> -- 1:07-cv-11070-LTS aka Never Beginning "GPL Enforcement" case<BR></FONT></P></DIV></BODY></HTML>