Re: License questions
From: Simon G Best (s.g.best_at_btopenworld.com)
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2003 21:23:14 +0000 (UTC)
Roger Schlafly wrote:
> "Simon G Best" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote
>>>Fairbrother has a legal theory that an author can irrevocably dedicate
>>>a piece of software with a GPL or BSD license, but that it is
>>>impossible for him to put it into the public domain. I think that he
>>Peter Fairbrother's "legal theory" is somewhat supported by the
>>information published through the websites referenced above, ...
> I don't believe it. You found a web site that doesn't appear to
> address any of the above alternatives, so I don't see how it
> supports the notion that one alternative works better than another.
Both of those UK government websites support the notion of licensing.
Neither supports (or even acknowledges (or even mentions! )) the 'PD'
notion of voluntarily putting work into the public domain such that it's
no longer under copyright. That particular 'PD' notion just doesn't
seem to exist or be recognised in UK law. (If it did, then it would be
very odd for it not to get even a single mention  in either of those
It does seem that, for UK law, Peter Fairbrother's "legal theory" is
 Apart from when reproducing members of the public's answers to
public consultation questions (in which case it was members of the
public, not the state, who were referring to the public domain in the