Re: history of the anti-copyright movement in the States

On Wed, May 24, 2000, Mike Oliver <mikeoliver[_at_]home.com> wrote:
>
> On 5/23/2000, Orrin "Simon" Onken <simon[_at_]loris.net> stated the following:
> >
> > I have heard people express concerns that the license created by
> > the GPL is without consideration. Thus, it might be revocable for
> > any or no reason. Do you think this is a concern?
>
> I was involved with a discussion on a similar issue either here or
> on Cyberia recently (implied licenses).
>
> [...]
>
> I'll leave the discussion of whether that contract can be rescinded
> or modified unilaterally by the offeror for another time (that was
> the prior issue I discussed, as I remember -> it came up in the
> context of when that company settled the copyright suit over the
> program that broke the filtering software code list could rescind
> the GPL code in respect of all the people who had downloaded the
> software, and those who had mirrored it)

Eugene Volokh was quoted at the time of the CyberPatrol case that some consideration might be needed. I spoke with Eben Moglen last month, briefly, and he indicated the FSF might change its web info to favor having the FSF legally own code under the GPL. However, Eben has been busy lately and this interesting point needs more thorough discussion.

The case in question, the cphack or CyberPatrol (Mattel / Microsystems) case in Boston, was not a good one to settle this question: it is quite possible that the code was never properly placed under the GPL to begin with.

> > Which brings up another question. Is there a way to irrevocably
> > transfer ones creation into the public domain.
>
> There is a huge thread on this topic in the archives. I recall no
> consensus of the posters. I never posted then, but it is my belief
> that if you accept the notion that there is a 'public domain' (which
> I do), then you almost have to accept that someone should be able
> to intentionally place something into it (so I believe you can).
> The questions are how do you do it?, and can you do it 'with strings
> attached'? -- I think the GPL represents an effort at putting code
> into the public domain, but by way of license, not abandonment.

Yes, I'm concerned because heirs have sometimes taken back rights when authors have directed them to the public. I don't know if this is going to occur in the future. But recently a tiny library in Nebraska that was given benefits from rights to works by Laura Ingalls Wilder, after her death, lost them when an heir reclaimed them. A lawsuit was mentioned in the news, but I heard nothing of the results.

I favor setting up a non-profit corporation that could legally accept donations of copyrights and patents. The main obstacle seems to be getting good pro bono legal advice from tax and intellectual property attorneys. The benefits would be considerable for copyright law: it could encourage, by means of tax deductions, republication on the Internet of works under copyright, many out-of-print. I think it would be better to give more incentives to do the right thing, rather than to encourage infringement. However, if such transfers are insecure then there would be a problem. Any free advice?

-- 
"Eric"  Eric Eldred  Eldritch Press
mailto:Eldred[_at_]EldritchPress.org
http://www.eldritchpress.org/EricEldred.vcf