On Fri, 15 Oct 2004, Robert Rolf wrote:

> "Peter L. Peres" wrote:
>>
>> While I do not really mind, this should be known. It means code posted on
>> the piclist becomes public domain and may be used by commercial 3rd
>> parties as a 'resource':
>
> Uhhh, wasn't that the reason you shared the code in the
> first place?? If you post ANYTHING, ANYWHERE (list, newsgroup,
> web site) it is effectively 'public domain', even though
> you -should- be able to retain your copyrights to it.

Yes, BUT I'd like to know where it goes and who has control over it. If 
you want to know, I just searched for myself on Google and Google groups, 
with key "peter l. peres". Be sure to expand the search results (show 
'similar' results which were hidden) if you do this to yourself or with 
my key. Otherwise Google will hide a lot of postings.

> All code on this site is free for non-commercial use.
> Commercial use normally free, however, it is prohibited
> without contacting DesignREM Ltd. for permission.
>
> {but they do NOT have the authority to GRANT permission,
> so what's the point of the footer?}

Aha, you are getting the point alright I think.

> All content on this site created by Shane Tolmie is
> Copyrighted by Shane Tolmie 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004.
> ================
>
> EXCUSE ME???
> The people who posted the "original work" own the copyright.
> By posting publicly, they may have given up that right.
> Shane CANNOT then lay claim to some else's work.

Yep. And yet ...

>> Is this list's archive public, or not. Once and for all.
>
> piclist.com is publically accessible, so this list
> is effectively PUBLIC.

What exactly is the legal meaning of public whereabouts you are ? Does it 
mean anything you lay hands on and claim is yours unless the owner sues 
you ? I hope not. F.ex in the above case an additional line by Shane 
saying 'message contents are copyrighted by their respective authors' 
would have cleared him. But there is no such message.

> For a time it was also gated into a newsgroup,
> WITHOUT proper email address filtering, with the
> result that many posters were spammed as punishment
> for their contribution to piclist.
>
> The noted site has some nice resources, BUT
> it's only a matter of time before Microchip sends
> their lawyers after him for trademark infringement.
> Look at how Tony's picmicro.com site was forced to
> change names because of corporate lawyering.

I know, I was asking this for a reason. I understand Shane's position but 
we already know it is untenable. Or is it ?

Peter
_______________________________________________
http://www.piclist.com
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist