[od-discuss] Open Definition 2.1 final draft

Wed Jul 29 03:54:03 UTC 2015

On 28/07/15 08:42 PM, Aaron Wolf wrote:
> 
> I suggest slight modification:
> 
> "The *work* must be provided under an open *license* (as defined in
> Section 2) or be in the public domain with no extra limitations. A work
> may be in the public domain by default or released into the public
> domain by a successful waiver of all copyright and database rights. Any
> additional terms accompanying the work (such as terms of use, or patents
> held by a licensor) must not contradict the terms of the license or the
> public domain status."

This does seem to head off various exploits.

What about ambiguous public domain status, e.g. US Government work
outside the US?

On the one hand adding a Free/Open license to PD work can be
rightswashing. On the other it can avoid the complexities of copyright
law as it impacts the public domain across different jurisdictions.