From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-return-30270-listarch-gdb=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 22234 invoked by alias); 19 Nov 2007 08:55:23 -0000
Received: (qmail 22226 invoked by uid 22791); 19 Nov 2007 08:55:23 -0000
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from mail2.ks.pochta.ru (HELO mail2.ks.pochta.ru) (82.204.219.182)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Mon, 19 Nov 2007 08:55:20 +0000
Received: from [80.135.25.42] (helo=janus.mylan) 	by mail2.ks.pochta.ru ( sendmail 8.13.3/8.13.1) with esmtpsa id 1ItyeK-0006ZV-P7 	for gdb@sourceware.org; Mon, 19 Nov 2007 07:54:21 +0300
Received: (qmail 32032 invoked by uid 1000); 19 Nov 2007 08:57:25 -0000
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2007 08:55:00 -0000
From: Sergei Golubchik <sergii@pisem.net>
To: Robert Dewar <dewar@adacore.com>
Cc: Jim Blandy <jimb@codesourcery.com>, gdb@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: DUEL support
Message-ID: <20071119085725.GA31909@janus.mylan>
Mail-Followup-To: Robert Dewar <dewar@adacore.com>, 	Jim Blandy <jimb@codesourcery.com>, gdb@sourceware.org
References: <20071117201326.GA25388@janus.mylan> <m3y7cvgfgw.fsf@codesourcery.com> <20071119064833.GA31161@janus.mylan> <47413200.9020201@adacore.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <47413200.9020201@adacore.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2007-11/txt/msg00182.txt.bz2

Hi!

On Nov 19, Robert Dewar wrote:
> Sergei Golubchik wrote:
> 
> >Yes, according to the "GPL vs. public domain" file in the
> >distribution he was (though it was in 1993). But why would it matter,
> >he explicitly put his patch under public domain ?
> 
> One potential problem is that in some countries, for sure France, it
> is not possible for an author to entirely disclaim copyright moral
> rights, so putting something in the public domain can be a legally
> dubious notion.

Not really. An author cannot disclaim all rights, but he can disclaim
material rights, which is enough to re-release a software as GPL.

> And how do we know the patch is in the public domain even in the US
> without a signed document. A notice on a file means nothing legally.

There're signed documents too - I mean publications and PhD thesis where
the author says plain and clear that "Duel is public-domain software".

Regards
Sergei