Re: Copyright notices.

[Malcolm Tredinnick <malcolm commsecure com au>]

Sorry. Having sent all this explanation, I left out my suggestion for
how to resolve things...

On Fri, Nov 15, 2002 at 12:26:55PM +1100, Malcolm Tredinnick wrote:
[...]
> This means, for example, since Australia does not require a strict form
> of copyright notice (any notice clearly stating the intent that the
> document is copyrighted by a certain group or individual is sufficient),
> I can put such a notice on and I am protected internationally under the
> Berne and TRIPS agreements. However, I need to put "C in a circle" to be
> valid in a country that is a signatory to the UCC, but not Berne or
> TRIPS. Following the US law here, for example, is insufficient for me,
> since I am not a "national, citizen or resident of that country" (the
> phrasing used by the Berne convention).
> 
> I do not know which countries GNOME is used in that are UCC, but not
> Berne convention signatories and not members of the WTO, but I guess
> there must be some.
[...]

I would like to suggest that we say the copyright holder is required to
include a notice that is valid in their own country (of citizenship or
residence, whichever is more appropriate) and is compatible with as many
of the major international treaties of which that country is a signatory
as possible. Maybe we give a few examples, but it's hard, since we need
to get some good advice on what is valid in different countries.

For example, I should state in some fashion that I assert copyright
status over the document (not required, but good practice) and should,
where possible, include the copyright symbol in the statement (Patrick's
second, longer form) so that it's valid in countries that are UCC
signatories as well.

Most important is that any copyright notice does not contain false or
misleading information, since that is a way to invalidate the copyright
(under Berne). Missing notices can be overcome, false ones are harder.

Malcolm

-- 
"Very funny, Scotty. Now beam down my clothes."