3 ms·

This almost but not quite sounds like the concept of public domain.

mthoms 10y ago
Public domain is a specific legal term denoting that something is entirely without copyright protection. His project is still covered by copyright using terms set forth in his license agreement. Be aware that the phrase "public domain" is often misused to describe content "publicly available on the internet" or "in a public space". Usually that content is indeed covered by copyright since that is the default in law. Copyright applies automatically from the moment something is created.
- shiro 10y ago
  I think the grandparent meant the rule that a copyrighted work becomes public domain after certain period of creation or author's decease.
  - gpvos 10y ago
    Except that GPL is not at all like public domain. An MIT- or BSD-style license might be close enough to public domain to count.
- HugoDaniel 10y ago
  Not "entirely without copyright". Once you create something the moral copyright is yours forever. What this means is that nobody else can claim they did it, even if its in the public domain. I cannot claim i wrote the Shakespeare works even though they are in the public domain. He still has the moral copyright over them.
  - icebraining 10y ago
    Actually, in the US, you can!
  - mthoms 10y ago
    In order to prevent ambiguity "moral rights" is the term generally used for what you are calling "moral copyright" as I understand it. But you are correct, except with the note that because moral copyright rules vary by jurisdiction it's not necessarily "forever". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_rights https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_rights
  - vog 10y ago
    This is only true for countries like Germany and France, where a more accurate translation would be "authors' rights law" or "creators' rights law", instead of "copyright law". In countries with an actual "copyright law" like GB and US, things are different. There may still be "moral rights", but not nearly as good we know it from Germany and France.
- njharman 10y ago
  > Copyright applies automatically from the moment something is created. That only became true, for US jurisdiction, in 1976 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Act_of_1976 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Act_of_1976 The original purpose of Copyright and Public Domain and stated purpose of time-bomb license are practically identical. To promote creation, innovation, etc by providing a limited period of monopoly to authors (implication being to make money on it). After which the work would join our shared cultural heritage (in the Public Domain). It's only the perverse twisting and expansion of copyright in modern times that makes such a "new" license required.
  - mthoms 10y ago
    Where did I say anything contrary to what you just wrote?

Public domain is a specific legal term denoting that something is entirely without copyright protection. His project is still covered by copyright using terms set forth in his license agreement. Be aware that the phrase "public domain" is often misused to describe content "publicly available on the internet" or "in a public space". Usually that content is indeed covered by copyright since that is the default in law. Copyright applies automatically from the moment something is created.

shiro 10y ago
I think the grandparent meant the rule that a copyrighted work becomes public domain after certain period of creation or author's decease.
- gpvos 10y ago
  Except that GPL is not at all like public domain. An MIT- or BSD-style license might be close enough to public domain to count.
HugoDaniel 10y ago
Not "entirely without copyright". Once you create something the moral copyright is yours forever. What this means is that nobody else can claim they did it, even if its in the public domain. I cannot claim i wrote the Shakespeare works even though they are in the public domain. He still has the moral copyright over them.
- icebraining 10y ago
  Actually, in the US, you can!
- mthoms 10y ago
  In order to prevent ambiguity "moral rights" is the term generally used for what you are calling "moral copyright" as I understand it. But you are correct, except with the note that because moral copyright rules vary by jurisdiction it's not necessarily "forever". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_rights https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_rights
- vog 10y ago
  This is only true for countries like Germany and France, where a more accurate translation would be "authors' rights law" or "creators' rights law", instead of "copyright law". In countries with an actual "copyright law" like GB and US, things are different. There may still be "moral rights", but not nearly as good we know it from Germany and France.
njharman 10y ago
> Copyright applies automatically from the moment something is created. That only became true, for US jurisdiction, in 1976 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Act_of_1976 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Act_of_1976 The original purpose of Copyright and Public Domain and stated purpose of time-bomb license are practically identical. To promote creation, innovation, etc by providing a limited period of monopoly to authors (implication being to make money on it). After which the work would join our shared cultural heritage (in the Public Domain). It's only the perverse twisting and expansion of copyright in modern times that makes such a "new" license required.
- mthoms 10y ago
  Where did I say anything contrary to what you just wrote?