Re: Copyright on list archives

From: Alan Dechert <adechert_at_earthlink_dot_net>
Date: Mon Aug 18 2003 - 08:53:34 CDT

I agree with this.

Alan Dechert

----- Original Message -----
From: "Douglas W. Jones" <jones_at_cs_dot_uiowa_dot_edu>
To: <>
Sent: Monday, August 18, 2003 6:48 AM
Subject: Re: [voting-project] Copyright on list archives

> On Sunday, August 17, 2003, at 05:09 PM, David Mertz wrote:
> > Arthur Keller <> wrote:
> > |Placing our messages in the public domain is fine with me. Do we
> > |want also to assert that the documentation is in the public domain,
> > |or that it is GPL?
> >
> > I would probably say yes on the PD documentation too. But I'm flexible,
> > as long as it is an Open approach.
> I'd agree -- documentation for voting systems really belongs
> out in the open, completely in the public domain! While I'd
> like to see restrictions on the source code, for example:
> Copies of all or any part of this code may be used freely
> in non-voting applications. Copies of all or part of this
> code may not be used in voting applications unless the entire
> revision history relevant to the code in question is retained
> and additions are made to reflect any and all revisions to
> that part of the code that is copied.
> My intent with this restriction is not to prevent copying or
> disclosure of the code, but rather, to make failure to retain
> and maintain the revision logs into a violation of the copyright
> on the code. This is not something that GPL deals with, but it
> seems to me that is isn't a bad thing to add.
> But that applies only to the code. I believe the documentation
> for voting systems, and for that matter, much of the public
> infrastructure of the world, should be in the public domain.
> Doug Jones
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain
Received on Sun Aug 31 23:17:11 2003

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Aug 31 2003 - 23:17:18 CDT