Re: Public domain and DEP-5-compliant debian/copyright
Ben Finney writes ("Re: Public domain and DEP-5-compliant debian/copyright"):
> Florent Rougon <f.rougon@free.fr> writes:
> > 1. I have files in a program with the following "copyright" statement:
> > # Copyright (C) 2002-2010, 2013, 2014 ...
> > # Copyright (C) 2000 ...
> > #
> > # This program is in the public domain.
> > but, as I understand it, public domain is the absence of copyright...
> > right?
>
> Right. The quoted statement is self-contradictory. It asserts copyright,
> and gives no grounds for the “public domain” claim.
>
> It also fails to grant license for any of the DFSG freedoms. So by
> strict interpretation of the statement in view of rigid application of
> copyright law, the work is effectively non-free software.
This is nonsense. Courts are not computers. When interpreting legal
documents such as licences, they read the intent of of the author.
In this case the author's intent is clear: the author wants to
disclaim the monopolies granted by copyright law. The statement is to
be read as a permissive licence. So no-one is in any danger of being
sued by the (purported) copyrightholder.
Obviously it would be better if the authors fixed this technical
defect, but it has no significant practical consequences.
Ian.
Reply to: