[PLUG] software-project-todo

म.हा.सा.ग.र o.s.h.o at guruvision.com
Wed Feb 11 03:14:55 PST 2009


On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 1:07 PM, Aditya Godbole <aag.lists at gmail.com> wrote:
> 2009/2/11 म.हा.सा.ग.र <o.s.h.o at guruvision.com>:
>> ... much more than my posts perhaps...
>> and he has a right to cite license to be followed for all of the text
>> (s)he utters... because it is free (not as in free speech or beer but
>> in some other way which follows that license)
>
> Anyone has the right to attempt to put any license on his/her work.
> But there are still some fundamental laws the govern copyright. One
> cannot, for example prevent fair use. One cannot impose a license on
> something that you put on public property. One cannot restrict use of
> something that one knows is going to be archived, reproduced, quoted,
> partly quoted in replies which are also going to be public.
>
> Posting on a public mailing list is different from posting on a blog
> or a website. A blog can have an identity associated with it and can
> carry copyright notices, because the holder of the blog has a
> responsibility of the content on it. Where there is a dispute on the
> ownership of the content, like in the case of mailing list archives,
> it becomes the responsibility of the owner of the site. In this case,
> that is the owner of the PLUG site. Hence to avoid disputes, its up to
> the owner of the site to impose some sort of license. If someone on
> the list fails to comply with a CC license in a reply (which is
> displayed in the archives), who then is responsible for copyright
> infringement?
> Hence the suggestion of discarding all legal ownership of the work
> when posting on public mailing lists.
>
> -aditya
>

how would you address that if it was you who were on the other side of
this argument?

that would be helpful in bug fixing.. !



More information about the plug-mail mailing list