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

Re: data "copyright" or not -- what is Debian's take?

Francesco Poli <frx@firenze.linux.it> writes:

> On Mon, 24 Jan 2011 16:07:11 +0000 Simon McVittie wrote:
> > I'm not a lawyer or anything, but would this work?
> > 
> >     To the extent that it is covered by copyright under any applicable laws,
> >     this data is copyright © 1984 Winston Smith.

I don't see a need to specify “data”. What's wrong with “work”, the term
normally seen in English-language copyright discussions for any
information covered by copyright?

That difference in terminology isn't a legal issue, though.

> >     Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person
> >     [... and the rest of the usual MIT license text]

Where “the usual MIT license text” presumably means the more precise
“terms of the Expat license”.

> I'm not a lawyer either, but I think this could be a good strategy.

So long as the terms are as I specified above, I think that's a good
strategy also, but it is only effective if done by the copyright holders
(not unilaterally by a third party).

 \       “I love to go down to the schoolyard and watch all the little |
  `\   children jump up and down and run around yelling and screaming. |
_o__)             They don't know I'm only using blanks.” —Emo Philips |
Ben Finney

Attachment: pgpRU3NSHE6wM.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: