That wouldn't work because the original author would be able to prove
he was the owner of the copyright.
Comrade RIngo Kamens
On Sun, Jun 22, 2008 at 4:16 PM, Paul de Weerd <weerd@weirdnet.nl> wrote:
quoted text
> On Sun, Jun 22, 2008 at 04:09:37PM -0400, Ringo Kamens wrote:
> | My guess would be that the content is released into the public domain
> | since you can't sue because there is no proof that you are the
> | copyright holder.
> | Comrade RIngo Kamens
>
> Let me just steal some code somewhere, relicense it and release it as
> 'anonymous'. *poof* .. it's public domain because you can't sue ?
>
> That's a bit too easy...
>
> Cheers,
>
> Paul 'WEiRD' de Weerd
>
> --
>>++++++++[<++++++++++>-]<+++++++.>+++[<------>-]<.>+++[<+
> +++++++++++>-]<.>++[<------------>-]<+.--------------.[-]
>                 http://www.weirdnet.nl/