Re: Re: Attribution is not required in public domainmaterials

Joseph Pietro Riolo wrote:

> You mention the concept of the ownership. In the world of the
> public domain, there is no concept of ownership. (Technically
> speaking, everyone owns the public domain but because there
> is no one who cannot own it, ownership becomes meaningless.)
> Do you own your own ideas? No. The ideas belongs to everyone.
> Therefore, there is no reason to provide attribution to anyone
> who provides the ideas.

Are we talking past each other? I have no problem with the free flow of ideas. It is verbatim copying with false attribution that I have a problem with.

> Because open source and free-according-to-Stallman software are
> not truly public domain, it is possible to force people to provide
> attribution through terms and conditions in license but that is
> a different topic.

The GPL is an interesting case of copyright/license judo, but I think that the details of Open Source/Free Software licenses (of which the revised BSD license is probably the closest to public domain) is off topic for this list.

>>But take my code and claim you wrote it!? I work in a highly technical
>>environment. The work you are able to do is directly related to your
>>detailed knowledge about a highly specific field. I guess the
>>scientific term is that I live in a meritocracy. My worth as an
>>employee is directly related to my knowledge - and my ability to prove
>>that I have that knowledge. Claiming my work as yours is claiming that
>>you have my knowledge. I'll be long gone when the copyright expires
>>so I don't care about my right to attribution after the expiration of
>>copyright protection, but as long as I'm still alive I don't want
>>anyone else claiming my expression as their own.

Everyone is affected by their environment, common culture and sources like discussions with friends at the coffee table, books, radio and TV, IEEE and RFC standards documents. It is probably close to impossible to make something out of nothing. A society where one is not at liberty to take most ideas and concepts and use them would be a very inefficient society. I think we agree on that point.

But I still think a boundary is crossed if one copies a considerable amount of expression with false attribution.

> Do you give attribution
> for every idea, concept, expression, and so on that you copy
> or use?

Usually not. However, if I copy a considerable amount of an expression it seems fair to give attribution. The same if a particular person gave me a particular idea or insight that is important.

> Do you write 300 pages of credits at the end of your
> 50-page report? I am questioning your claim that the knowledge
> in your code or field is wholly yours ("my knowledge").

1 or 2 pages sounds more sensible. And at the same time, I don't expect other people to attribute me unless they copy verbatim.

As for "my knowledge" - that is a product of whatever processing power my mind has and influence from a lot of external sources.

I certainly don't claim ownership like one can claim ownership to one's car or house to the ideas and thoughts that wander through my mind, nor do I claim that whatever ideas are in my head are unique and that I have the right to deny other people to have or use the same ideas.

Nor do I claim that when I publish something I have complete ownership to the expression - both fair use, other copyright exemptions and common sense limit my "ownership". But don't put your name on that 50-page report.

-- 
LarsG