On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 09:17 am, Rafael 'Dido' Sevilla wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 08:28:41AM +0200, Florian Hars wrote:
> > skaller wrote:
> > >On Sat, 2003-09-20 at 00:48, Florian Hars wrote:
> > >>Using anything else will just add to the confusion
> > >
> > >What's wrong with plain old 'public domain'?
> >
> > In many parts of the world, including most of europe where many ocaml
> > users live, about the only way for an author to release something he has
> > written into the public domain is to have died seventy years ago. This
> > may cause a significant slowdown of the development of a library.
>
> Really?  An author may not *voluntarily* release his or her own work into

Yes really. I've seen exactly the same issue come up on other mailing lists. 
An example of such a jurisdiction (so I am told) is Germany.

> the public domain?  I don't see how that may be so.  It is certainly not
> true under US copyright law, nor is it the doctrine of the Berne
> Convention.  I was under the impression that possession of the copyright
> to a particular work implies you also have the full and unlimited power
> to license your work as you see fit.
>
> -------------------
> To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives:
> http://caml.inria.fr Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ:
> http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ Beginner's list:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners

Regards
M.Beach

-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners