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

Re: Choosing a License: GNU APL? AFL 3.0?

"Sean B. Palmer" <sean@miscoranda.com> writes:

> On Jan 1, 2008 10:36 PM, Ben Finney wrote:
> > A copyright license doesn't need to make anything explicit that
> > is already explicit in copyright law.
> Okay. So is the preservation of copyright notices already explicit
> in copyright law?

I don't know. My current understanding is "yes" to a first
approximation. It would take actual lawyers to provide a more
trustworthy answer on this one; and it's very likely the answer
involves "it depends".

> > I wonder how many other requirements that you care about in
> > copyright law are entirely unexamined because you've not seen them
> > explicated in any license text.
> Well, what other heuristic should I use? I can't justify the cost of
> a lawyer for this, so I can only make the best assumptions that I
> know how to make, and ask friends and people on debian-legal and so
> on...

It is to your credit that you do so, seriously.

 \     "I know you believe you understood what you think I said, but I |
  `\         am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I |
_o__)                                  meant."  -- Robert J. McCloskey |
Ben Finney

Reply to: