[cfe-dev] standard headers questions

me22 me22.ca at gmail.com
Thu Dec 13 19:10:40 PST 2007

On 13/12/2007, Sean Middleditch <sean at awesomeplay.com> wrote:
> > > Something like Boost's license, I'd say.  And it can't be public
> > > domain, see http://www.rosenlaw.com/lj16.htm :
> > > "there is nothing that permits the dumping of intellectual property
> > > into the public domain — except as happens in due course when any
> > > applicable copyrights expire"
> >
> > Excellent link, lots of food for thought.
> I didn't put much faith in that page due to a complete lack of
> references, so I searched around a bit, and it seems accurate.  Here's a
> much more obtuse but better defended essay on public domain.  It
> includes a section on public domain software and why it's not really
> possible to to do with today's laws:
> http://www.edwardsamuels.com/copyright/beyond/articles/public.html
> The gist of the arguments against public domain dedication are that
> modern law goes so far as to protect authors against putting works in
> the public domain, because the author might not understand what he's
> doing until it's too late.  The laws have become very pro-producer,
> con-consumer (which, etymologically, I find freaking hilarious).

Thanks, that's a good site to know.  You might be interested in
Rosen's book instead, which (having read the treeware version, I was
quite surprised to find out) is available online at
http://www.rosenlaw.com/oslbook.htm .  I knew of the short article, so
I didn't go hunting in the book, but the book does site U.S.C. fairly
often.  It's not law-school rigorous, but I appreciate the grounding
it gave me in the concepts and issues.  (Of course, you may also be
past that.)

~ Scott

Sed quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

More information about the cfe-dev mailing list