[tz] NIST leap-second file not yet updated

Brian Inglis Brian.Inglis at systematicsw.ab.ca
Tue Feb 23 21:05:47 UTC 2016

On 2016-02-18 15:18, Paul G wrote:
> Yes, I agree. I'm just wondering why the reluctance about CC-0. According to Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creative_Commons_license#Zero_.2F_public_domain), it was originally designed to facilitate free sharing of scientific data, which is essentially the use case here.
> Unfortunately, I think most of the problems with public domain / CC-0 is in Europe (see, e.g. http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/cc-community/2014-October/008866.html about how in Norway works in the Public Domain are subject to a levy). To the extent that it's possible, the best situation would probably be a dual license between CC-0 and something equivalent to CC-BY (MIT, BSD, etc.), so that in countries where it's better to use the data under a slightly more restrictive license, you can do that. Presumably IERS has some sort of legal counsel that can sort things out, though.
> In my experience, it's a real nightmare to affirmatively discharge all your copyrights in something in a way that doesn't come back to bite you in some jurisdiction.

Ouch - good catch - so Norway, Spain, and perhaps by now South Africa
and other governments, can assign the ownership of all Public Domain
works to collection societies, who can then levy charges!
In most jurisdictions, there are levies or taxes on various products,
media, and operations (e.g. photocopying, printing) to cover mooted
royalty losses to legal (and illegal, where that applies) "copying",
which I would expect to cover these marginal cases.
How could this even impact freely created software and data, freely
distributed electronically and globally?

I suspect folks chasing this money would be extremely disappointed
if ubiquitous electronic monitoring were employed to count all of
the actual occurrences of violations claimed to their rights, that
are not covered by fair use regulations. My guess would be that their
claims are all worst case scenarios: actual prevalence between 1-50%
of those claims, and financial losses worth about 1% of that number;
likely a lot less than any commercial product promotional budget,
which includes giving away a lot of product.

Take care. Thanks, Brian Inglis, Calgary, Alberta, Canada

More information about the tz mailing list