Besides, if you can't release your work into the public domain, does
that mean the United States government and creative commons (which I
assume to know their legal stuff) and numerous other organisations are
all wrong in doing so?
I don't think so.
Fred, do you have a law degree?
--Mgm
On Apr 9, 2005 12:28 PM, Fred Bauder <fredbaud(a)ctelco.net> wrote:
Property can ordinarily be given away. What is needed
is clear intent. If
intellectual property is somehow an exception this would need to be
demonstrated. Definitive demonstration is probably impossible but one would
look in decisions of courts of appeal such as the Supreme Court of the
United States. I doubt they or other federal courts have addressed this
issue specifically.
I don't see how the language, "I release this image into the public
domain"
would fail.
If it is not sufficient by itself, estoppel would come into play. Estoppel
is the principle that if there is forseeable reliance on your representation
you can't come along later and say that what you said didn't really mean
what it seemed to.
Fred
From: MacGyverMagic/Mgm
<macgyvermagic(a)gmail.com>
Reply-To: MacGyverMagic/Mgm <macgyvermagic(a)gmail.com>om>, English Wikipedia
<wikien-l(a)Wikipedia.org>
Date: Sat, 9 Apr 2005 10:50:15 +0200
To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l(a)wikipedia.org>
Subject: [WikiEN-l] No PD
What do you guys think about this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_%28policy%29#You_can.27…
rant_your_work_into_the_public_domain?
The page this editor links to doesn't seem to have all that
authoritive sources as he claims and according to his userpage he's
not an lawyer or something either. Should we follow this up?
-- MacGyverMagic
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l