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

Re: "public domain" software licensing and copyright?



At 01:22 PM 10/18/00 -0500, Michael A. Miller wrote:
I'd like to package ImageJ: http://rsb.info.nih.gov/ij/

     "ImageJ is a public domain Java image processing program
     inspired by NIH Image for the Macintosh. It runs, either as an
     online applet or as a downloadable application, on any
     computer with a Java 1.1 or later virtual machine."

There is a copyright and licensing issue that I think needs to be
explored - the author tells me that

    "ImageJ is in the public domain. No license is required.
    There is no copyright. You are free to package the ImageJ
    source code and JAR file with Debian Linux, but please
    include a README file that points to the ImageJ Web page so
    people can get documentation and updates."

I have asked the author to license the work according to one of
the GPL, BSD or Artistic licenses.  Can anyone advise me as to
the need for that?  Are there examples of "public domain"
software in Debian where the issues of copyright and license are
made explicit?

"Copyright" is a monopoly on the right to copy, distribute, derive from, perform, etc. In order to copy, distribute, etc a copyrighted work, one must get permission from the copyright holder.

A (copyright) license is the embodiment of permission form the copyright holder, specifying exactly what the copyright holder is permitting you to do, and under what conditions.

"Public Domain" is a condition in which a work has no legitimate copyright, either because it expired or was repudiated by the author. No license to copy, etc, can exist because there is no one to grant permission -- and no one to deny it either. Anyone can do whatever they want with the public domain -- including package it as a binary-only package in a non-free product with no credit to the original author. There is no monopoly; it belongs to the public.

It should be sufficient in this case to include the author's statement in the COPYRIGHT file, since the statement you quoted is a clear repudiation of his copyrights on the program.

I am not a Debian Developer myself... If you want a reasonably official pronouncement, you might want to try debian-legal instead.



Mike



Reply to: