Raul writes: > The fundamental question is: does this governmental work meet DFSG
I don't believe that I have ever disputed that. > Secondly, 17 USC 103 isn't the right section. Let's start with 17 USC > 105: I already cited that. > In other words, there's no limits on distribution, modification, etc. Right. The author is forbidden to enforce its copyright. No one else has any standing to do so. You have no rights to the material: you cannot sue people who make copies without your permission. Neither can anyone else, so everybody is free to do as they please with it. Your distribution of copies of the material with a license attached cannot change that fact. Public domain works are ones to which *no one* owns any rights and therefore no one can sue you for making copies of them. The report you cite implies that the Congress intended that works of the US Government be treated as if they were in the public domain (I wish they had said so in so many words in the law). When you distribute copies of such a work under the GPL you are claiming that you have the right to sue people for making copies of it. You don't. The law is not about to let you take material to which you own no rights, attach a license to it, and enforce that license. -- John Hasler [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Hasler) Dancing Horse Hill Elmwood, WI
