> -----Original Message-----
> From: piclist-bounces@mit.edu On Behalf Of Olin Lathrop
> Sent: Saturday, May 10, 2008 8:36 AM
>
> Byron Jeff wrote:
> > It's the none at all that's the real problem. Without a license, no
> > one has any right to do anything with the source for your software.
>
> Are you really sure?  I am not a lawyer, but if there are no restrictions
> listed then it seems to me there are no restrictions.  Many things on the
> internet have no explicit copyright and are routinely copied.  I don't
> remember anyone claiming that something without a explicit copyright was
> illegally copied.

IANAL either but, my employer's IP legal firm went over it in detail with
me. This was back in 1991, the first time we wanted copyright protection. We
had patents and trademarks but hadn't needed copyrights until then. Here's
what I learned from the IP lawyers.

Without an explicit license all works automatically receive complete
copyright protection. This even applies to a finger painting by a three year
old child. The moment the child creates the finger painting it acquires full
copyright protection that lasts until 70 years after the death of the child.

This is not how the laws worked in the USA prior to 1978 when I entered the
work force. Back then the default status was public domain, you had to
explicitly request copyright protection if you wanted it. Starting in 1978
the default changed to full copyright protection which harmonized the US
laws with most of the rest of the world. In 1989 the requirement of placing
identifying marks on a work was removed so, anything distributed after 1989
receives full protection without even identifying marks. AFAIK, no-one has
yet won a copyright suit without having identifying marks and you must
explicitly file with the copyright office if you want to get statutory
damages from an infringement lawsuit.

So, if you copy something from the internet that does not have an explicit
public domain release statement or a license granting you rights, it is
likely a violation of copyright law to distribute it in any way. If the work
you copied and distributed has no identifying mark you won't be sued for
damages but you can be made to stop distributing it. There is a concept of
fair use but it is an inadequately defined legal concept generally subject
to interpretation by the courts on a case by case basis.

A few reference pages on US copyright:
http://www.templetons.com/brad/copyright.html
http://www.templetons.com/brad/copymyths.html
This is Brad Templeton's personal site, he's Chairman of the Board of the
EFF.

http://www.copyright.gov/
http://library.findlaw.com/1999/Jan/1/241476.html
http://www.eff.org/issues/intellectual-property
http://creativecommons.org/

Paul Hutch
Proud EFF Member, join us at http://www.eff.org/

<snip>

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist