From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,c887193050c097ce
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-02-12 10:39:02 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!dispose.news.demon.net!news.demon.co.uk!demon!pogner.demon.co.uk!zap!not-for-mail
From: Simon Wright <simon@pushface.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Problem with GNAT modified GPL and SourceForge
Date: 11 Feb 2002 19:44:24 +0000
Organization: Pushface
Message-ID: <x7vg047ls6f.fsf@smaug.pushface.org>
References: <3C625604.1C948A06@gmx.de>
 <slrna655ki.sg.randhol+abuse@kiuk0156.chembio.ntnu.no>
 <a3u5f2$8f3$1@nh.pace.co.uk>
 <slrna67f4p.qd.randhol+abuse@kiuk0156.chembio.ntnu.no>
 <a40op1$ddk$1@nh.pace.co.uk>
 <slrna6a6n3.q8.randhol+abuse@kiuk0156.chembio.ntnu.no>
 <yecg04a9p7m.fsf@king.cts.com> <a45nq0$d1b$1@a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>
 <a46e3s$7pu1@news.cis.okstate.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pogner.demon.co.uk:158.152.70.98
X-Trace: news.demon.co.uk 1013539110 nnrp-08:6576 NO-IDENT
 pogner.demon.co.uk:158.152.70.98
X-Complaints-To: abuse@demon.net
NNTP-Posting-Date: 11 Feb 2002 19:44:26 GMT
X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.7
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:19947
Date: 2002-02-11T19:44:26+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

David Starner <dvdeug@x8b4e53cd.dhcp.okstate.edu> writes:

> On Sun, 10 Feb 2002 12:07:28 +0000 (UTC), Georg Bauhaus <sb463ba@l1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de> wrote:
> > Keith Thompson <kst@cts.com> wrote:
> >  
> >: An important quibble: "public domain" means entirely free of copyright
> >: and licensing restrictions.
> > 
> > Perhaps one should add that, if this applies, it applies to 
> > works when the laws of the US of America apply.
> 
> Huh? Why? If code has been placed in the public domain in the US,
> it's probably been placed in the public domain everywhere. There's
> not much code that's in the public domain because of obscure US
> legal reasons.

I was surprised (shouldn't have been, I guess) to find that our (UK)
lawyers seem to place a different meaning on the phrase "public
domain". They say we should not say "(c) XYZ plc 2002" on any document
we are not intending to be used for publicity purposes because it
"places the document in the public domain". I have no idea what this
means to them, IANAL, but there certainly seems to be a difference
between what these guys think and what most of us have come to
understand by the phrase.

This all struck me as so deeply depressing that I didn't chase it
further (of course, that would have required a lot of work exploring
the halls of Moria).