[clug] OT: Congratulations Caroline...
conrad at mail.watersprite.com.au
Mon Oct 27 04:18:12 GMT 2008
On Mon, 2008-10-27 at 12:22 +1100, steve jenkin wrote:
> Peter Barker wrote on 27/10/08 11:46 AM:
> > Hmm. Is "public domain" the correct (lack-of-needing-a) licence to use?
> > You give an example of perl, which is *not* public domain :)
> I was using 'public domain' in the sense that the work is publicly
> viewable... As in "released into the public domain, but rights
> reserved". Perl is freely downloadable, but subject to a (liberal) license.
I realise its a technicality, and I understand what you are saying,
'Public domain' in a copyright sense has a very specific meaning which
is not at all what you want it to mean. The FSF would be having words to
you if you went around calling the GPL 'public domain' (because in a
legal sense it very definitely is not.... :-)).
I'm not sure that there really is a generic term that covers your
intention, unless 'free and open source software' would cut it for you.
More information about the linux