3 ms·

They say it's public domain so it is, indeed, license-free. AFAIK, the public domain dedication makes the rest of the section chaff.

by cbd1984 10y ago

wongarsu 10y ago
In many jurisdictions there is no concept of public domain, and thus declaring your work as public domain has no effect in many parts of the world. The author granted a license for all Creative Commons licenses, which includes CC-Zero (public domain where that's possible, the closest possible equivalent everywhere else). That's the real part that makes the rest of the section unnessesary.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
llull 10y ago
Chaff? For a project where one has total control, yes. When one has to get approval and deal with a specific list of approved licenses (which may not include one's particular favourite, no matter how sensible it seems to oneself), then no. It is appreciated.
Twirrim 10y ago
SQLite is public domain, but they've made licensed versions of it available for people to buy, because: a)public domain is a concept that is far from a world wide legally recognised concept (its roots are in old English law) b) public domain scares company lawyers and it's easier to give them an actual license :D
- masklinn 10y ago
  > public domain is a concept that is far from a world wide legally recognised concept Right, the "continental" (franco-german) IP school having moral rights which the anglo-saxon IP school doesn't have[0][1]. These moral rights tend to be perpetual, non-waivable, non-assignable and inalienable, as a result the concept of public domain in the anglo-saxon sense doesn't really make sense, instead "public domain" is a shorthand for works whose economic rights have lapsed (that is in fact the original meaning of the term as coined by Alfred de Vigny) or works which don't have associated economic rights in the first place (e.g. mathematical proofs, parliamentary transcripts) rather than an actual legal concept, and an author can only waive their economic rights through licensing. [0] the english Crown Copyright has some similarities [1] anglo-saxon copyright roughly matches the continental "economic rights" subset of author's rights
- liblfds 10y ago
  Indeed. It was with lawyers in mind I went for overkill on the licensing front. I wanted to wholly and completely remove that issue from consideration.
weinzierl 10y ago
The license is interesting but the discussion is off-topic here. I created another thread about the license: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11807463 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11807463

They say it's public domain so it is, indeed, license-free. AFAIK, the public domain dedication makes the rest of the section chaff.

by cbd1984 10y ago

They say it's public domain so it is, indeed, license-free. AFAIK, the public domain dedication makes the rest of the section chaff.

wongarsu 10y ago

In many jurisdictions there is no concept of public domain, and thus declaring your work as public domain has no effect in many parts of the world. The author granted a license for all Creative Commons licenses, which includes CC-Zero (public domain where that's possible, the closest possible equivalent everywhere else). That's the real part that makes the rest of the section unnessesary.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

llull 10y ago

Chaff? For a project where one has total control, yes. When one has to get approval and deal with a specific list of approved licenses (which may not include one's particular favourite, no matter how sensible it seems to oneself), then no. It is appreciated.

Twirrim 10y ago

SQLite is public domain, but they've made licensed versions of it available for people to buy, because: a)public domain is a concept that is far from a world wide legally recognised concept (its roots are in old English law) b) public domain scares company lawyers and it's easier to give them an actual license :D

masklinn 10y ago
> public domain is a concept that is far from a world wide legally recognised concept Right, the "continental" (franco-german) IP school having moral rights which the anglo-saxon IP school doesn't have[0][1]. These moral rights tend to be perpetual, non-waivable, non-assignable and inalienable, as a result the concept of public domain in the anglo-saxon sense doesn't really make sense, instead "public domain" is a shorthand for works whose economic rights have lapsed (that is in fact the original meaning of the term as coined by Alfred de Vigny) or works which don't have associated economic rights in the first place (e.g. mathematical proofs, parliamentary transcripts) rather than an actual legal concept, and an author can only waive their economic rights through licensing. [0] the english Crown Copyright has some similarities [1] anglo-saxon copyright roughly matches the continental "economic rights" subset of author's rights
liblfds 10y ago
Indeed. It was with lawyers in mind I went for overkill on the licensing front. I wanted to wholly and completely remove that issue from consideration.

weinzierl 10y ago

The license is interesting but the discussion is off-topic here. I created another thread about the license: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11807463 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11807463