3 ms·

Just because Daniel Bernstein claims something on the internet doesn't make it any truer than, well, if I claim it. [okay, maybe a little truer. He did write q

Just because Daniel Bernstein claims something on the internet doesn't make it any truer than, well, if I claim it. [okay, maybe a little truer. He did write qmail] But I'm particularly interested in Bernstein's ad hominem broadside on Rosen for stating, while general counsel for OSI I believe, that public domain dedication is unlikely in the US. Rosen is "only a lawyer" according to Bernstein -- who I might add is "only a mathematician". Though you have to give him props for representing himself in Bernstein v. Commerce. I myself think that Rosen's conservative position is the right one. Even Lessig's CC0 dedication is couched in tons of careful "we're not sure if this works" verbiage. At any rate, presuming this is unsettled law -- and it seems to me that it's pretty unsettled -- that alone makes it unwise to be attempting a public domain dedication.

tptacek 15y ago
Dan Bernstein's a mathematician (albeit one unusually well versed with the legal system, for obvious reasons), but you should also note that one of the commenters on this very subthread is a lawyer. I'm really not interested in the conflict between the OSI and Dan Bernstein. I'm just responding to your comment. Pretty sure you're wrong about PD being a "fiction".
- SeanLuke 15y ago
  > I'm really not interested in the conflict between the OSI and Dan Bernstein. I'm just responding to your comment. Well, you did directly cite an article, about a third of which is devoted to smacking down someone with more cred than himself. That being said, my comment about PD being a "fiction" was overly excessive bomb-throwing, I admit.
  - tptacek 15y ago
    Thanks. But, can I just add two things: that's about as specific a legal argument as I've ever seen an engineer (or mathematician) make, including chapter/verse citations to actual court decisions. Not only are you mischaracterizing it, but you might also take a moment to be specific about which parts of it you disagree with. Why should we be interested in how we feel about people's interpersonal conflicts? Bernstein is right or he isn't. Second: I didn't call you out for bomb-throwing (that would be hypocritical in the extreme). Can I ask, how much of your original comment do you still stand by?

tptacek 15y ago

Dan Bernstein's a mathematician (albeit one unusually well versed with the legal system, for obvious reasons), but you should also note that one of the commenters on this very subthread is a lawyer. I'm really not interested in the conflict between the OSI and Dan Bernstein. I'm just responding to your comment. Pretty sure you're wrong about PD being a "fiction".

SeanLuke 15y ago
> I'm really not interested in the conflict between the OSI and Dan Bernstein. I'm just responding to your comment. Well, you did directly cite an article, about a third of which is devoted to smacking down someone with more cred than himself. That being said, my comment about PD being a "fiction" was overly excessive bomb-throwing, I admit.
- tptacek 15y ago
  Thanks. But, can I just add two things: that's about as specific a legal argument as I've ever seen an engineer (or mathematician) make, including chapter/verse citations to actual court decisions. Not only are you mischaracterizing it, but you might also take a moment to be specific about which parts of it you disagree with. Why should we be interested in how we feel about people's interpersonal conflicts? Bernstein is right or he isn't. Second: I didn't call you out for bomb-throwing (that would be hypocritical in the extreme). Can I ask, how much of your original comment do you still stand by?