"walter" == walter harms <wharms@bfs.de> writes:
walter> hgi list, i was following these thread .. so far i walter> understand is the tz database a compiled list and not walter> protected. So noone would be hurt if Ado add something like walter> "this list is compiled from public source" walter> or from gfdl: walter> " Copyright (C) <year> <your name>. Permission is granted to walter> copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms walter> of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any walter> later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with walter> no Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no walter> Back-Cover Texts. A copy of the license is included in the walter> section entitled "GNU Free Documentation License". " walter> note: i do not suggest to make this gfdl. it is only an walter> example how they describe there licence inside a document. Can we get an authoritative answer please? GFDL is something COMPLETELY different from "public domain". If one is right then the other is wrong. And yes, the list is compiled from public source, but that doesn't directly answer the question of the copyright on the resulting work. It might not qualify in any case in the USA under the "sweat of the brow" rule (Feist v. Rural, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Copyright_law#Compilations_and_the_sweat_o...). But if it's a work of the USA and thereby in the public domain, that's an easier route. paul