Does it make sense for software to have a GNU licence and a statement of "Copyright Person A, all rights reserved"? I feel like those two things are in conflict with each other? @MozOpenLeaders? @SoftwareSaved #collabw18
CC @npch. So I'm now confused, is what we said wrong then? It certainly feels weird to say all rights reserved when it's open to me. Hmm.
-
-
I think I interpret
@DailyPedantry’s response to say that as the copyright holder, you retain all rights, which allows both GPL and dual-licensing, and that you claim that by using the phrase “All Rights Reserved” (1/2) -
However the use of this phrase was a convention under Buenos Aires Comvention of 1910, which became obsolete in 2000. Therefore the phrase is not necessary to assert copyright and is arguably confusing. But not wrong. (2/2)
-
WOAH - fun facts galore! Thank you all for the discussion!
-
Ahhhhhhh. OK, good. And thanks to her (
@DailyPedantry) and you, Neil! -
Yes, thanks
@DailyPedantry
! -
Bonus fact! Registering a copyright is now cheaper than certified mailing it anywhere. So, “poor man’s copyright” despite always being dubious, is now more expensive than just registering.
- End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
“reserved” is most of the key here. Namely, that the GNU license cannot be used to restrict an individuals own rights with respect to their code. Basically, it is open to you only under license. Break the GPL, lose your right to access/use.
-
Got you. Thanks!
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.