I do, but I'm not trying to give legal advice, just discussing the issue. Your reply seems to assume I think you cannot release into the public domain. What I think I said is that I don't think there is a significant problem, although when you look at some of the theoretical underpinnings there are some questions. For example, there is the notion of consideration.
A contract is not binding unless both parties gave something. So, for example, if I sign a contract to work for someone for a year without anything at all in return the contract fails for lack of consideration. Frequently a sum on $1.00 is specified as the selling price of a car or piece of land that is in fact given away. It is thought that recitation is necessary to make it legal.
What does Wikipedia (or any internet publisher) give in return for a release of copyright? Publishing and distribution of the material.
As a practical matter, I will continue to rely on explicit written releases of material into the public domain which I belive to be reasonable.
Fred
From: MacGyverMagic/Mgm macgyvermagic@gmail.com Reply-To: MacGyverMagic/Mgm macgyvermagic@gmail.com, English Wikipedia wikien-l@Wikipedia.org Date: Sat, 9 Apr 2005 13:30:37 +0200 To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@wikipedia.org Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] No PD
Besides, if you can't release your work into the public domain, does that mean the United States government and creative commons (which I assume to know their legal stuff) and numerous other organisations are all wrong in doing so?
I don't think so.
Fred, do you have a law degree?
--Mgm
On Apr 9, 2005 12:28 PM, Fred Bauder fredbaud@ctelco.net wrote:
Property can ordinarily be given away. What is needed is clear intent. If intellectual property is somehow an exception this would need to be demonstrated. Definitive demonstration is probably impossible but one would look in decisions of courts of appeal such as the Supreme Court of the United States. I doubt they or other federal courts have addressed this issue specifically.
I don't see how the language, "I release this image into the public domain" would fail.
If it is not sufficient by itself, estoppel would come into play. Estoppel is the principle that if there is forseeable reliance on your representation you can't come along later and say that what you said didn't really mean what it seemed to.
Fred
From: MacGyverMagic/Mgm macgyvermagic@gmail.com Reply-To: MacGyverMagic/Mgm macgyvermagic@gmail.com, English Wikipedia wikien-l@Wikipedia.org Date: Sat, 9 Apr 2005 10:50:15 +0200 To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@wikipedia.org Subject: [WikiEN-l] No PD
What do you guys think about this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_%28policy%29#You_can.27t _g rant_your_work_into_the_public_domain?
The page this editor links to doesn't seem to have all that authoritive sources as he claims and according to his userpage he's not an lawyer or something either. Should we follow this up?
-- MacGyverMagic _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l