On 08/14/2012 11:43 PM, Chris Travers wrote: > I don't see how copyright can be enforced when it is both explicitly > disclaimed and the link with the author is severed. There would be no > way to enforce it, nobody to go after for implicit warranties, etc. > After all it would be like asking whether an anonymous pamphlet left > at a college cafeteria was copyrighted.
Disclaiming it as PD is again the key topic. Anonymous works are still copyrighted, at least in the U.S. (http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap3.html): "In the case of an anonymous work, a pseudonymous work, or a work made for hire, the copyright endures for a term of 95 years from the year of its first publication, or a term of 120 years from the year of its creation, whichever expires first." Not only that, but: "If, before the end of such term, the identity of one or more of the authors of an anonymous or pseudonymous work is revealed in the records of a registration made for that work under subsections (a) or (d) of section 408, or in the records provided by this subsection, the copyright in the work endures for the term specified by subsection (a) or (b), based on the life of the author or authors whose identity has been revealed." Of course, you have to provide evidence of who the anonymous author was, but without an effective PD dedication, that alleged revelation could open up a legal battle-field. Matt Flaschen _______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
