-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 02/03/2012 06:02 AM, Josh Boyer wrote: > > It's not clearly marked. Clearly marked would be "This code is > Public Domain" or simply "Public Domain". The author is not > relinquishing copyright with the terse statement, they are just > saying you can do whatever you want with the code. It's a subtle > difference IMHO. Only because it's interesting to ponder, I wonder if the Tristan is accurate that the code can be (re-)licensed on the copyright holders' behalf based on the License: statement? That was my first thought, and second was to use a permissive license (BSD, MIT, AL, etc.) to preserve the apparent intent of the original author/copyright holder. </ponder> - - Karsten - -- name: Karsten 'quaid' Wade, Sr. Community Architect team: Red Hat Community Architecture & Leadership uri: http://communityleadershipteam.org http://TheOpenSourceWay.org gpg: AD0E0C41 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iD8DBQFPLDS22ZIOBq0ODEERAl1jAKDXo6bgIfGtuQp492VW2NoQZq3bdQCfVCqK pSf8mVYSzOq/GVwequ0aLLA= =wm02 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ legal mailing list legal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/legal
