RE: Re: Re: Software Licensing Agreement

> > Some of us believe that a public domain disclaimer has some
> risks and
> > flaws under current copyright law, which does not make any
> provision
> > for such disclaimers.
>
> There are always some individuals who claim that disclaiming
> intellectual property rights is not possible. That's their opinion.
> Until there is clear law or court case that it is not
> possible to disclaim intellectual property rights, their
> opinion is completely groundless.

Mr. Riolo,

You again misread my remarks. I did not use the word "impossible." I merely suggested that there are "risks and flaws under current copyright law."

Rather than suggest that people put their works into the public domain, you might want to grant a broad and effective license that can avoid those risks and flaws.

/Larry

• Lawrence Rosen
• Rosenlaw & Einschlag, technology law offices
• Stanford University School of Law, Lecturer in Law
• 3001 King Ranch Road, Ukiah, CA 95482
• 707-485-1242 * fax: 707-485-1243
• Author of "Open Source Licensing: Software Freedom
• and Intellectual Property Law" (Prentice Hall 2004)
• [www.rosenlaw.com]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: CNI-COPYRIGHT -- Copyright & Intellectual Property
> [mailto:CNI-COPYRIGHT[_at_]cni.org] On Behalf Of Joseph Pietro Riolo
> Sent: Monday, February 06, 2006 9:15 AM
> To: CNI-COPYRIGHT -- Copyright & Intellectual Property
> Subject: [CNI-(C)] Re: [CNI-(C)] Re: [CNI-(C)] Software
> Licensing Agreement
>
> On 1/30/06, Lawrence Rosen <lrosen[_at_]rosenlaw.com> wrote:
> >
> > This proves a danger of giving specific legal advice on a
> public list.
>
> You are very, very, very mistaken in portraying my post as a
> legal advice. None of my posts is ever intended to be legal advice.
>
> >
>
> > Some of us believe that a public domain disclaimer has some
> risks and
> > flaws under current copyright law, which does not make any
> provision
> > for such disclaimers.
>
> There are always some individuals who claim that disclaiming
> intellectual property rights is not possible. That's their opinion.
> Until there is clear law or court case that it is not
> possible to disclaim intellectual property rights, their
> opinion is completely groundless.
>
>
> Joseph Pietro Riolo
> <josephpietrojeungriolo[_at_]gmail.com>
> <riolo[_at_]voicenet.com>
>
> Number of days left until 1-1-2019 when all knowledge of 1923
> in the land of the U.S.A. will be freed from their copyright
> owners' prisons: 4,712
>
> Public domain notice: I put all of my expressions in this
> post in the public domain.
>
> #############################################################
> This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to
> the mailing list <CNI-COPYRIGHT[_at_]cni.org>.
> To unsubscribe, E-mail to: <CNI-COPYRIGHT-off[_at_]cni.org> To
> switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to
> <CNI-COPYRIGHT-digest[_at_]cni.org> To switch to the INDEX mode,
> E-mail to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-index[_at_]cni.org> To postpone your
> subscription, E-mail to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-null[_at_]cni.org> To
> resume mail list message delivery from postpone mode, E-mail
> to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-feed[_at_]cni.org> Send administrative queries
> to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-request[_at_]cni.org>
>
> Visit the CNI-COPYRIGHT e-mail list archive at
> <https://mail2.cni.org/Lists/CNI-COPYRIGHT/>.
Received on Tue Feb 07 2006 - 02:40:41 GMT