Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

The GP wasn't referring to DRM or DMCA type "copyright protection" as the phrase is typically used. Nobody in this thread has mentioned any of that.

The GP is referring to legal protections, and guess what?

Linux is legally protected by copyright!

Linux is legally protected by copyright!

Linux is legally protected by copyright!

Nearly every GPL license--every one that we could name--protects a copyrighted work! Nearly every GFDL, AGPL, LGPL protects works by means of copyright law!

Can you imagine that? So do the Apache license, the BSD licenses, the MIT license! Creative Commons (except for CC0) these licenses are legally protecting copyrighted works. Thank you!

Now everyone who proposes to draw down limits on copyright coverage and reduce the length of terms and limit Disney from their Mouse rights, y'all are also proposing the same limits on GPL software, such as Linux, and nearly every work with a license from the above list -- all of Wikimedia Commons, much of Flickr.com, all your beloved F/OSS software will be subject to the same limitations and the same restrictions you want to put on Paramount and the RIAA's labels.



Yeah, I think most of us are fine with 50 years old Linux kernel being released into public domain.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: