Re: Building An Apple ][ Software Archive

["Arkain" <rwking@usa.nospam.net>]

"Paul Guertin" <pg@sff.net> wrote in message
7gaets027tj23q8966ruiblm140cbtm13g@news.newsguy.com">news:7gaets027tj23q8966ruiblm140cbtm13g@news.newsguy.com...
> "Arkain" <rwking@usa.nospam.net> wrote:
>
> > The copyright called GPL goes 1 step further [...]
> > The GPL enforces public domain status.
>
> These are mutually exclusive. Something cannot be under copyright
> and in the public domain at the same time. As GPLed software is
> under copyright, it is not in the public domain.

That's one of the uglier things about the GPL. Technically, the work covered
by the GPL is merely freeware since it has a copyright. The catch is that
the GPL places the work *PERMANENTLY* in a status equivalent to public
domain, barring the right to "embrace & extend" of course. This curiosity of
the GPL is why it is called a "copyleft" instead of a copyright.

> Unlike the word "freeware", the terms "copyright" and "public domain"
> have a precise legal meaning. Don't use them loosely.

I've kept the meaning of the terms in tact... mostly. If you consider the
"copyleft" something that's not a copyright (as the FSF does) then GPL works
are indeed PD since they don't have a copyright in that sense.

I know that this argument is suspect. That is why I don't and won't use the
GPL for the majority of my "free" works.

Arkain