<posted & mailed> Arnoud Engelfriet wrote:
> Ben Finney wrote: >> Perhaps the statement should be granting the recipient "all rights >> otherwise reserved to the copyright holder". > > Maybe it's better to reformulate it as a non-assert instead of > a license. There's more than just the exclusive rights. > > To the extent permitted by law, the copyright holder of this work > hereby declares he will not, now or at any time in the future, exercise > any right under copyright, related rights or moral rights applicable to > the work against any person or legal entity. This declaration shall be > construed to the detriment of the copyright holder to the maximum > extent permitted by law. Invalidity or unenforceability of any part of > the above shall not affect any other part. Finally an actual lawyer steps in. :-) Nice draft. I think that's an excellent idea Only one quibble, but it's an important one: it doesn't waive the rights of heirs or assignees. To the extent possible, we want to do that *too*. Any ideas? > (You can't waive your right to protest against mutilation of > your literary work, and software is a literary work according > to Berne and WIPO.) > > Arnoud > -- Nathanael Nerode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Bush admitted to violating FISA and said he was proud of it. So why isn't he in prison yet?... -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
