77 lines
3.4 KiB
Plaintext
77 lines
3.4 KiB
Plaintext
The copyright situation regarding zmac is not totally clear.
|
|
This is what Russell Marks had to say when I asked him:
|
|
|
|
"
|
|
> [...] I would
|
|
> like to make double sure that zmac is indeed public domain and so
|
|
> freely distributable and modifyable. Can you confirm this? Have the
|
|
> various authors of zmac over the years agreed to give away their
|
|
> copyright?
|
|
|
|
This is a difficult area, partly because I'm not a lawyer. :-) None of
|
|
them seemed to explicitly give away their copyright, but equally, none
|
|
of them asserted it either. If you really want to be sure that it's
|
|
all entirely public domain, the sort of thing that would definitely
|
|
stand up in court, you'll have to try and contact all three previous
|
|
contributors (my changes are definitely PD, you wouldn't have to worry
|
|
about that). I have vague memories of seeing both Colin Kelley and
|
|
John Providenza's names mentioned in more recent things than zmac, but
|
|
I don't know any contact addresses for them (nor for Bruce Norskog).
|
|
|
|
OTOH, if you're just after some general reassurance that it's ok to
|
|
distribute a hacked version, I'd say it's fine - if nothing else,
|
|
Colin Kelley posted it to comp.sources.unix in 1987, so he must have
|
|
thought it freely distributable and modifiable (the latter because he
|
|
made changes himself). I think an earlier version had featured in
|
|
simtel's "UNIX-C" directory too.
|
|
|
|
Also, this point from the copyright FAQ may be relevant:
|
|
|
|
> 2.2) What is "public domain?"
|
|
>
|
|
> In contrast to copyright is "public domain." A work in the public domain
|
|
> is one that can be freely used by anyone for any purpose.
|
|
>
|
|
> It used to be that if a work was published without notice, it lost all
|
|
> copyright, and entered the public domain. That's no longer true, and now
|
|
> public domain is more the exception than the rule.
|
|
>
|
|
> There are still a number of ways that a work may be public domain.
|
|
[...]
|
|
> - The copyright might have been forfeited. For example, the work
|
|
> may have been published without notice prior to the change in
|
|
> the law that eliminated the notice requirement (March 1, 1988,
|
|
> the effective date of the Berne Convention Implementation Act,
|
|
> PL 100-568, 102 Stat. 2853).
|
|
|
|
zmac was published without a copyright notice in 1987 (and, one
|
|
assumes, long before then as well). This is the main reason I describe
|
|
zmac as public domain - the 1987 posting was published source with no
|
|
copyright notice and no license being distributed for free by one of
|
|
the authors. That smells of PD to me, even without the above. :-) I
|
|
just don't see what else it could really be. But getting real,
|
|
legally-sound confirmation of this would be a challenge.
|
|
|
|
I know this isn't the "yep, no problem, and here are all the authors'
|
|
current addresses so you can check for yourself" you may have been
|
|
looking for, but there it is.
|
|
|
|
FWIW, I distribute zmac with ZCN (my GPL'd CP/M-like OS for the
|
|
Amstrad NC100). In case that contributes anything to this. :-)
|
|
"
|
|
|
|
[Needless to say, I too forfeit any copyright claim on my changes!]
|
|
|
|
I am therefore assuming that zmac is public domain (note, however,
|
|
that the Act above is probably an American one and different
|
|
conditions may apply in e.g. the European Union). I am not a
|
|
lawyer, though, and I would strongly suggest you don't abuse this.
|
|
In particular, I wouldn't use zmac or portions thereof in any
|
|
commercial product.
|
|
|
|
If any of the authors of zmac requests so, I will immediately
|
|
withdraw this release.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mark RISON, <mrison@hotmail.com>, 1999-07-19
|