Re: [bitcoin-dev] Open Block Chain Licence, BIP[xxxx] Draft

[Ahmed Zsales <ahmedzsales18@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1645 bytes --]

Your points are interesting, but they are covered:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwEbhrQ4ELzBMVFxajNZa2hzMTg/view?usp=sharing

Your general point: "Better just put everything in public domain" is the
reason why Bitcoin works, but taken to the extreme it is an argument
against attempts to obfuscate transaction ownership.

Regards,

Ahmed

On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 11:20 PM, Natanael <natanael.l@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> Den 2 sep 2015 00:03 skrev "Btc Drak via bitcoin-dev" <
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>:
> >
> > 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.
>
> Worse yet - transaction malleability creates derative works with multiple
> copyright holders (the original one, plus the author of the modification).
> Is that even legal to do? What to do if a miner unknowingly accepts an
> illegally modified transaction in a block? And can he who modified it ALSO
> sue anybody replicating the block for infringement?
>
> Better just put everything in public domain, or the closest thing to it
> you can get. Copyright in the blockchain is essentially the DVDCSS illegal
> prime mess all over again, but in a P2P network.
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2771 bytes --]