To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
References: <CADr=VrRT2tdN0jjkZ7HjjeyqonrHG=j+uh8m1L2nhew7c1gnng@mail.gmail.com>
	<CADJgMztScEsDEy277Jksy2RckbpzeRw6RbQzyVrdkjJSS=hHPA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CADr=VrQ42Gqv7fUFVpaburw0=08SNXb0TUCBWd3arREbpdfCkA@mail.gmail.com>
	<55E61A64.2030609@bitcoins.info>
	<CADr=VrQeQ2=Htcen-oJrJWWhf5aQ8-cjYK28ic1UWNFWMf2nDQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Milly Bitcoin <milly@bitcoins.info>
Message-ID: <55E629DF.3030407@bitcoins.info>
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2015 18:42:39 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
	Thunderbird/38.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CADr=VrQeQ2=Htcen-oJrJWWhf5aQ8-cjYK28ic1UWNFWMf2nDQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Open Block Chain Licence, BIP[xxxx] Draft
Precedence: list

> The general points and questions you have raised are covered in the
> draft BIP:

No, the BIP makes some weird statements that don't really make sense.

Number one rule here:  To put a license on something you have to own it 
in the first place.

Let's say for the sake of argument that Miners own the copyright on a 
block they find (as pointed out something like does not normally get 
copyright protection but let's just pretend).  Then the miner can charge 
a fee for any public block explorer that wants to display the block at 
their web site.  They could also try to collect a fee from anyone who 
distributes it (like Bitcoin users using p2p to distribute the 
blockchain).  A copyright is about protecting revenue.  Is there some 
other purpose of putting a license on intellectual property?

Also, it is not up to you, or anyone else, to come up with the form of a 
license to control data owned by someone else.  How can you force miners 
  or users to use any specific license that you come up with?

There are a number of other weird statements that really don't make any 
kind of sense:

"In the USA, for example, these attributes confer legal protections for 
databases which have been ruled upon by the courts."  I have no idea 
what this means or what court cases you are referring to.

"The Bitcoin Core Miners" is not an identifiable entity and cannot own 
intellectual property rights.  What is the purpose of you putting a 
notice that some unidentifiable entity has some sort of rights over the 
blockchain data?  You are not that entity and neither are the 
developers.  If there are rights it is up to miners to come up with 
their license.

"[users] own the rights to their individual transactions through 
cryptograph security."  I have no idea what this means.  It is certainly 
not intellectual property rights of anything I am familiar with.  Once 
again, if the users do have intellectual rights then someone else cannot 
dictate the terms of the license.  They could charge a fee for miners 
publishing their transaction data.

Russ