Public domain software is not open-source?

[Tzeng, Nigel H.]

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).

________________________________

From: Alexander Terekhov [mailto:alexander.terekhov at gmail.com]
Sent: Sat 3/1/2008 12:39 PM
To: License Discuss
Subject: Public domain software is not open-source?



:-)

http://www.news.com/8301-13580_3-9881858-39.html

-----
... OSI lists 68 compliant licenses.

Richard Hipp, who founded the SQLite database project in 2000 as a
public-domain project, believes it does qualify as open-source
software.

"I've had a number of conversations on this topic with corporate
lawyers for companies that are actively using SQLite. The consensus
there seems to be that 'public domain' is valid and is a proper subset
of 'open source'--except in France and Germany where the concept of
'public domain' is not recognized," he told me in an e-mail discussion
prompted by the Adobe story.

But not so fast. Take the view of Mark Radcliffe, the intellectual
property attorney who's general counsel to the Open Source Initiative.

When I asked Radcliffe if public domain software was open-source, he
was clear: "No. Truly public domain software is no longer protected by
copyright, thus it cannot have a license which would impose the terms
necessary to comply with any of the open source licenses," he said.

Agreeing with him is Louis Rosen, an attorney with Rosenlaw and
Einschlag who previously led OSI's legal work and who still is
involved. He directed me to an older but still relevant piece he wrote
about why the public domain isn't a license.

"'Public domain' will never be a license. It actually means 'No
license required,'" Rosen said. "Software that is 'dedicated to the
public' or 'to the public domain' is pretty safe. I just worry a bit
when people or companies give software away in such an amateurish way,
without understanding that licenses or covenants are far more
efficient and effective."
-----

regards,
alexander.

--
"12/21/2007 ORDER TO EXTEND TIME FOR DEFENDANT...
 01/22/2008 ORDER TO EXTEND TIME FOR DEFENDANT...
 02/19/2008 ORDER TO EXTEND TIME FOR DEFENDAT(sic)...
 02/26/2008 ENDORSED LETTER addressed to Judge Laura Taylor Swain from
Daniel B. Ravicher...
 02/27/2008 ORDER that Defendants Verizon Communications, Inc. has
until March 14, 2008..."

   -- 1:07-cv-11070-LTS aka Never Beginning "GPL Enforcement" case


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20080301/3863c667/attachment.html>