On Sunday, January 30, 2022 at 6:53:10 AM UTC+11, Rod Pemberton wrote:
> Just an FYI, Nils M Holm, the author of SubC is a
> citizen of Germany. Germany's legal system doesn't
> have a public domain concept, which is a U.S. legal
> system concept used to represent works of the U.S.
> government owned by it's citizens.
It's also what happens to all copyrighted work 70 years
after the death of the author. Not just in the US either.
What did you think the legal status of Shakespeare's
Hamlet was in Germany? GPL v2?
What is different in Germany etc is whether you can
release your work into the public domain with a PD
notice. Nils has CC0 to cover that in jurisdictions
where that is an issue. As do I for PDOS.
> The concept of
> public domain has never been tested for individuals
> in the U.S. and may not be legal.
The fact that no individual has ever released their work
to the public domain and then turned around and attempted
to sue someone for copyright infringement is a good track
record, not something to be concerned about.
> I.e., everything
> produced by Nils is automatically copyrighted under
> German laws, and the same is probably true for you
> as well as an Australian citizen ...
Even if things are copyrighted by default, that doesn't
mean you need to make matters worse by explicitly
including a copyright statement.
Even if a jurisdiction doesn't recognize releasing things
to the public domain as valid, that doesn't mean there is
something wrong with writing those words regardless,
to show what you really want to do, even if some
jurisdictions ignore it.
> I didn't bring up copyrights again to start an
> argument, but just so that you could compare with
> the open source licensed software below, which are
> "irrelevant" if you're not modifying their code, i.e.,
> if you're just using the software.
It's not "irrelevant" to me. I don't trust that a court
won't find that one of the 273 license conditions in
GPL was violated by me using the software. Only a
court can decide that, repeatedly. Until the court
decision is overturned, repeatedly.
But it's irrelevant anyway - if I discover a problem with
software I am using, I want to be able to debug it and
fix it and recoup my costs by distributing a closed-source
version of the software that is better than the original.
> > At the same time I would like to write an assembler
> > that takes that emitted source and produces a.out
> > object code, and later a linker to produce a.out
> > executables. I'm after simplicity at the moment.
> You might look at JWasm, Japheth's replacement
That doesn't produce a.out:
native support for output formats Intel OMF, MS Coff (32/64-bit), Elf (32/64-bit), Binary, Windows PE (32/64-bit) and DOS MZ
But again, I'm after a public domain assembler, and it
sounds like mine is going to be the best one on the
market after I've written 1 line of code.
> NASM and YASM
> are both open source, under 2- and 3- clause
> BSD licenses. BSD and MIT licenses are usually
> about as close to public domain as you can get.
Besides actual public domain/CC0, like mine will be.
Mine might be based on Nils's public domain 8086