The only thing that would cause a problem with 'Copyright Sisyphus' is that you are assuming the default copyright terms: No one but you is allowed to make or distribute copies.
That's only true in a few countries. In most countries, including the past 20+ years in the USA, the mere fact of creating the work makes it copyrighted. Absence of a copyright notice does not mean there's no copyright.
You may only assume a work isn't copyrighted if either the copyright has expired, or if it's explicitly stated the work is placed in the public domain.
| [reply] |
You may only assume a work isn't copyrighted if either the copyright has expired, or if it's explicitly stated the work is placed in the public domain.
Contrary to popular belief, stating that something belongs in the public domain does not actually put it there. Instead it is effectively just a bare license, without what lawyers call "an interest". So it may be revoked at any time by the author, or in the event of the author's death by the legal heir.
So the user doesn't actually get any meaningful legal protection. That's bad. But it gets worse. Releasing your code and calling it public domain means that you have the possibility of being sued if it doesn't work like someone else thought it would.
It is much, much better to use a simple, permissive license instead of trying to make it public domain. It protects your users better (you are less able to revoke it), and protects you better (you get some protection against lawsuits).
As for copyrights expiring, the simple rule for that which is likely work for all of our lifetimes is, "Is this text older than Mickey Mouse?" Seriously, every time Disney's famous movie Steamboat Willie threatens to become public domain, the law is changed to extend copyright.
But there is another way for something to become public domain. By law, work created by the government is not copyrightable.
(Note. I am not a lawyer. This is not legal advice. But I have spent time with people who have a serious interest in the law.)
Update: JavaFan is correct. I am describing US law here. Other countries vary widely. Though the Mickey Mouse rule is as close to universally true as Disney's lobbying can make it.
| [reply] |
By law, work created by the government is not copyrightable.
That depends on the government. It's the case for the federal US government, but there are many more governments on this planet. Googling for "copyright" and "ministery" in various languages quickly reveals that "work created by the government is not copyrightable" isn't universal.
| [reply] |
| [reply] |
True, you don't even need the notice. But the point remains that if that's all you are putting then legally CPAN is infringing on your copyright when it mirrors your modules. (Note: I am not a lawyer, I'm sure a lawyer could state why CPAN would be found not at fault. But I'm sure if it came up CPAN would have to remove your modules.)
If they want to submit it as an open-source module, they need to specify that it is being made available under an open-source license.
| [reply] |