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... 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