I would argue that there are a few ways this phrase can be inverted:

No rights reserved

Implies that the author waives all rights to his/her work (i.e. ultimately places it in the public domain)

All rights included

I’ve seen this one in the context of royalty-free music being used in the commercial sense, where if you pay for the license, you can use that song anytime anywhere, with all rights to the song. This seems to be the opposite of “All rights reserved” which we should know by now what it means

Copyleft

While not really a phrase, it is the opposite of copyright itself. Used primarily in software but maybe some other media can also be considered copyleft. As far as I’m aware, it has some ties with copyright itself (that you cannot remove attribution from the author, and, in case of software, must distribute it as is, without putting any restrictions yourself)

There are probably more means other than what I’ve listed, and I would love to hear your thoughts and suggestions!

  • Daniel Quinn@lemmy.caEnglish
    10·
    1 year ago

    You’ve just stepped into a minefield. Look up the difference between the MIT and GPL licences. If you’re into that sort of thing it can be fascinating, but basically it boils down to two camps:

    1. Your license preserves your freedoms by binding the licensee to a guarantee that they’ll preserve your freedom.
    2. Your license preserves nothing, but guarantees the licensee the right to do anything they want.

    Each camp claims theirs is “more free”. Only one can be right.