If you release to Public Domain, can you GPL later

I hate to be the to have to point this out, but if you release something to be "Public Domain" software, you can't put restrictions on said software.

Even if it is a very liberal license like the "GNU General Public License", "Public Domain" means that there are no restrictions.

The only reason I mention this is that someone posted what looks to useful code in the code archives and then has a GNU GPL in the code.

What seems to have happened is that the posted software was on the internet and GPL'd which was then converted to Blitz. If such is the case then it still cannot be posted on the code archives because you have to be the original author to release to the public domain.

If person who posted [u]is[/] the original author then GPL does not apply.

Requesting clarification from authorized agent of BRL.

You're right. If it's GPL, you cannot arbitrarily decide that you're going to release it to the public domain unless you're the original author or you have special dispensation from the author. Since the entry you mention still has the GPL license in it, then clearly this is not the case.

However, you don't need to use existing rules, but you can just define your own copyright rule. For example: this software is free to use on saturdays from 14-16 o'clock, but only if your PC is on the left side of your chair, and you have a 16:9 LCD monitor. The rules can change any minute, so please check back on the website for current rules to use this software.

Sure, but not for software that someone else has already given a specific license. Unless that license allows you to.

Does the code submit process actually tell you you're releasing it to the public domain. I only got to the first form, but had no code to add so didn't take it any further. If not, it should.

Donating something to the Public Domain means that you have to give up all of your copyrights and other legal rights to the code.

The problem with that is that there probably are countries where you cannot legally do this, because you have keep the copyright or some form of ownership. In this case, MIT or BSD-style licenses could be valid alternatives with almost the same result for those who want to use your code (they still would be free to do anything that they want with it, including incorporating it into own proprietary products and sell it under an own brand an name). For this reason, upon request, SQLite for example is also available not only in the Public Domain version but also in a specially licensed edition.

The GPL is certainly not what I would call a liberal license (the BSD and MIT licenses are) and the GPL only works because the licensor reserves his copyright. In many regards, the GPL is the most restrictive of the 'free' software licenses. After all, you are forced to open source your software also under the GPL when you link one piece of GPLed software to it, no matter how small this piece of code is. This is viral, not liberal. And everybody using Brucey's MySQL module for example should be aware of this fact; unless you purchase a commercial MySQL license, you --HAVE-- to GPL your entire program when you use Brucey's MySQL module. (This is the main reason why I prefer PostgreSQL.)

If the piece of software we are talking about here is accompanied by a GPL licenses, then the GPL would apply even if it was posted by the original author. Why else would there be the license text with it? It would be a violation of the terms of use of the code archives, but that does not remove the GPL restrictions from the code. The GPL would even affect all remaining parts of the code.

If the Code Archives require Public Domain software, then this piece of software has to be removed from the archives.

To answer the question "if you release to public domain, can you GPL later": Yes, you actually can. You can rename it, copyright it and sell it under your own name as if you were the author and sole owner of it. You cannot, however, claim ownership over the Public Domain version, since it belongs to everybody; meaning that the Public Domain version will always exist, no matter what you do with your re-branded version of it.

This obviously has no effect if the GPL code was not authored by the one who submitted it.



As you see in the quote above, the public domain policy has also been there since 2004. Are you perhaps referring to an older piece of code? In that case even if it was submitted by the author, GPL would apply.

Lumooja that's not copyright, it's an EULA.

BRL will probably delete this code entry when they spot it. There's nothing wrong with the code itself, just that it shouldn't have been submitted as PD because it's GPL.

PD means anyone can do anything they wish with it, including incorporating it within commercial software without attribution.

If you want to share code on this forum under any other sort of license, I suggest you host the code somewhere and post a link from here.

does it apply to 'converted code' :/

'converted code' could be seen as a 'derivative work', which would most likely still be bound to the original license.

So... unless you happen to reimplement the same algorithms independently, simply 'converting' it won't make a difference.

Is this the entry you're referring to?

http://www.blitzbasic.com/codearcs/codearcs.php?code=2308

Because really, it should be removed, as should any others which have incompatible licenses. Or at the very least, the "this has been declared PD" bit needs to be changed to the message which is displayed with older entries.