[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: public domain, take ?$B!g

On Mon, Sep 25, 2006 at 10:56:27AM -0700, Daniel Gimpelevich wrote:
> Greetings! I'm fully aware that the opinions stated on this list have no
> bearing on anything, but I would still like to ask whether anyone here
> might have any ideas for improving the wording of the following license
> header:
> #!bin/bash
> #
> # Let this be known to all concerned: It is the specific intent of the
> # author of this script that any party who may have access to it always
> # treat it and its contents as though it were a work to which any and all
> # copyrights have expired.
> #
> I thought about "s/author/sole author/" but decided against it as not
> generic enough. I can see how deciding against it may make it rather
> unclear as to whose intent is being expressed, but I think that would be
> rather moot anyway in the event of any dispute. I now cut the ribbon
> opening this to the free-for-all of opinions...

What about:

The author(s) of this script expressly place it into the public domain.


Roberto C. Sanchez

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: