public inbox for bitcoindev@googlegroups.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Btc Drak <btcdrak@gmail.com>
To: Ahmed Zsales <ahmedzsales18@gmail.com>
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Open Block Chain Licence, BIP[xxxx] Draft
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2015 23:02:52 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CADJgMzvBCiHJo++zrZtA4XuMnNd8D8fHEiS4E2OfoKm4j8sY1w@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CADr=VrQ42Gqv7fUFVpaburw0=08SNXb0TUCBWd3arREbpdfCkA@mail.gmail.com>

I think it gets worse. Who are the copyright owners (if this actually
applies). You've got people publishing transaction messages, you've
got miners reproducing them and publishing blocks. Who are all the
parties involved? Then to take pedantry to the next level, does a
miner have permission to republish messages? How do you know? What if
the messages are reproducing others copyright/licensed material? It's
not possible to license someone else's work. There are plenty rabbit
holes to go down with this train of thought.

On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 8:36 PM, Ahmed Zsales via bitcoin-dev
<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> That is a very good point.
>
> We considered whether data existing before a licence change would be
> covered, but we hadn't factored the potential need for gaining permissions
> for a change to be considered effective.
>
> We have proposed that miners be the main beneficiaries of licensing and
> there is a consideration on whether they should vote to adopt the new terms.
> While not the preferred route, that would overcome any issues to what is an
> otherwise honest 'error and omission.' There doesn't seem to be anyone who
> could claim to have suffered any economic losses so this may not be an
> issue. It merits further investigation.
>
> The block chain is in perpetual change, so the sooner a change is agreed
> upon, if at all, the more data it will cover without any reservations. At
> any rate, we believe the changes would be considered effective on a
> retrospective basis.
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 7:12 PM, Btc Drak <btcdrak@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Without commenting on your proposal at all, the general problem with
>> licensing after the fact is you require the permission of every
>> copyright holder in order to make the change.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 2:30 PM, Ahmed Zsales via bitcoin-dev
>> <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>> > Hello,
>> >
>> > We believe the network requires a block chain licence to supplement the
>> > existing MIT Licence which we believe only covers the core reference
>> > client
>> > software.
>> >
>> > Replacing or amending the existing MIT Licence is beyond the scope of
>> > this
>> > draft BIP.
>> >
>> > Rationale and details of our draft BIP for discussion and evaluation are
>> > here:
>> >
>> >
>> > https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwEbhrQ4ELzBMVFxajNZa2hzMTg/view?usp=sharing
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> >
>> > Ahmed
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > bitcoin-dev mailing list
>> > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
>> > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>> >
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>


  parent reply	other threads:[~2015-09-01 22:03 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-09-01 13:30 [bitcoin-dev] Open Block Chain Licence, BIP[xxxx] Draft Ahmed Zsales
2015-09-01 13:43 ` Milly Bitcoin
2015-09-01 13:50 ` Bryan Bishop
2015-09-01 15:11   ` Ahmed Zsales
2015-09-01 16:05 ` Natanael
2015-09-01 17:39 ` Luke Dashjr
2015-09-01 18:12 ` Btc Drak
2015-09-01 19:36   ` Ahmed Zsales
2015-09-01 21:36     ` Milly Bitcoin
2015-09-01 22:02       ` Ahmed Zsales
2015-09-01 22:42         ` Milly Bitcoin
2015-09-01 23:21           ` Ahmed Zsales
2015-09-01 23:40             ` Milly Bitcoin
2015-09-01 22:02     ` Btc Drak [this message]
2015-09-01 22:11       ` Ahmed Zsales
2015-09-01 22:47         ` Btc Drak
2015-09-01 22:20       ` Natanael
2015-09-01 22:28         ` Ahmed Zsales
2015-09-01 21:51 ` Wladimir J. van der Laan
2015-09-01 23:39 ` hurricanewarn1
2015-09-02  8:56 ` Warren Togami Jr.
2015-09-02 20:28   ` Ahmed Zsales
2015-09-02 20:58     ` Milly Bitcoin

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=CADJgMzvBCiHJo++zrZtA4XuMnNd8D8fHEiS4E2OfoKm4j8sY1w@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=btcdrak@gmail.com \
    --cc=ahmedzsales18@gmail.com \
    --cc=bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox