------- Forwarded Message
Return-Path: wk@gnupg.de Delivery-Date: Fri May 4 16:21:18 2001 Return-Path: wk@gnupg.de Received: from vhssv1.vhs (root@vhssv1.vhs [192.168.0.100]) by vhssv1.vhs (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id QAA12226 for dalcolmo@vhssv1.vhs; Fri, 4 May 2001 16:21:18 +0200 Envelope-to: dalcolmo@vh-s.de Delivery-date: Fri, 4 May 2001 14:59:45 +0200 Received: from pop.puretec.de by vhssv1.vhs (fetchmail-4.3.8 POP3) for <dalcolmo/vhssv1.vhs> (single-drop); Fri, 04 May 2001 16:21:18 MEST Received: from [194.77.88.106] (helo=kasiski.gnupg.de) by mx01.kundenserver.de with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #3) id 14vf9h-0004Uq-00 for dalcolmo@vh-s.de; Fri, 4 May 2001 14:57:58 +0200 Received: from uucp by kasiski.gnupg.de with local-rmail (Exim 3.16 #1 (Debian)) id 14vfdi-0004u4-00; Fri, 04 May 2001 15:28:58 +0200 Received: from wk by alberti.gnupg.de with local (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 14vfDc-0004mk-00; Fri, 04 May 2001 15:02:00 +0200 Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 15:02:00 +0200 From: Werner Koch wk@gnupg.org To: Josef Dalcolmo dalcolmo@vh-s.de Subject: Re: Public Domain Message-ID: 20010504150200.F18016@alberti.gnupg.de References: 988880828.1386.0.camel@movel.puzzle.pt 20010503112826.D10211@alberti.gnupg.de <026F0A85.20010503121732.FOO-210.frank @g-n-u.de> 20010503123659.I10211@alberti.gnupg.de 1AA0E0C4.20010503190554.FOO-4730.frank@g-n-u.de <20010503205154.C14937@albert i.gnupg.de> E14vacn-0000E7-00@eniac Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: E14vacn-0000E7-00@eniac User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.18i X-PGP-KeyID: 621CC013 X-PGP-CertKey: A4D9 4E92 B098 6AB5 EE9D CD75 5DE2 4996 5B03 58A2 X-Request-PGP: finger:wk@porta.u64.de
[didn't you want to send this to the list? - feel free to post my answer if you like]
On Fri, 4 May 2001, Josef Dalcolmo wrote:
the use of (C). Some people thought that a C in parenthesis means nothing, only the c in the circle, e.g. the special character has any legal meaning. I do not know however, if this is still the case and if it is really just an issue in the USA.
The only thing I know is that the current GNU coding standards say that you should write:
Copyright YEAR1, YEAR2, YEAR3 COPYRIGHT-HOLDER
In the USA, copyright is automatic, meaning anything I write is copyrighted to me, even without copyright notice. From the mails here I gather this is the same in England. Does this also apply to other European countries?
At least for Germany. The legislation within Europe is quite similar, so it should be true for most countries. However there is no copyright register in Germany and writeing a notice like above is not needed (afaik, it is not even needed in the U.S. but if it is there it will be easier enforce the copyright)
, to the extent permitted by law; without even the
- implied warranty of MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR
PURPOSE. *)
Is this necessary? I suppose since law always supersedes any copyright statement, this is really redundant. If I just say "without any warranty",
Not in Germany, but it seems to be neded in the U.S. where about every device has some kind of no-warrnaty notice. Reminds me on the movie The Furtune Cookie, where Walter Matthau said "Okay, we sue United Fruit" after a client told him that he has slipped on a banana peel.
In any case, I think the "to the extent permitted by law" is definitely redundant, since no text except law can override law.
Lawyers say it is needed, so we do it. Even that it is not valid or needed in Germany it does not do any harm.
Werner
- -- Werner Koch Omnis enim res, quae dando non deficit, dum habetur g10 Code GmbH et non datur, nondum habetur, quomodo habenda est. Privacy Solutions -- Augustinus
------- End of Forwarded Message