People tend to throw out terms without looking them up because they heard them from others, and they sound good or right. Let’s look at the phrase All Rights Reserved. People believe it is how you tell people that you reserve your inalienable rights and/or civil rights.
There is something you should know first. You can not copyright a name. All Rights Reserved has to do with copyrights. Let us say for example that your name is John Doe. Why can’t you copyright a name like John Doe? How many John Does are there out there? A lot! Does that mean every John Doe would be in violation of using that name? It would be a violation of copyright laws to use it the wrong way so now they would become liable if you could. That would violate natural law or the natural order. You would then be placing other John Doe’s into an undue burden.
Undue burden is defined as follows; A substantial and unjust obstacle to the performance of a duty or enjoyment of a right. • For example, excessive discovery requests place an undue burden on the person who must produce the data requested. And a state law requiring a particular kind of mud flap on trucks may place an undue burden on the flow of interstate commerce. Black’s Law Dictionary (11th ed. 2019)
Now that you have this context let us look at All Rights Reserved;
All rights reserved is defined as follows; (1874) Copyright. A phrase required as part of a valid copyright notice under the Buenos Aires Convention. • Because other international copyright treaties do not require the phrase, and all signatories to the Buenos Aires Convention are parties to other treaties, the phrase is now considered surplusage. Black’s Law Dictionary (11th ed. 2019)
So when you are using this term you are telling the other party that you have a copyright on the item, and if that is the case it is not a valid copyright.
Do not get me wrong though. I understand what you are trying to express and there is a term that does express this.
Without prejudice is defined as follows; adv. (15c) Without loss of any rights; in a way that does not harm or cancel the legal rights or privileges of a party.
And the explanatory statement under the definition states the following;
“without prejudice. A phrase that, when incorporated in contracts, stipulations, and other written instruments, imports that the parties have agreed that, as between themselves, the receipt of the money by one, and the enjoyment by the other, shall not, because of the facts of the receipt and payment, have any legal effect upon the rights of the parties in the premises; that such rights will be as open to settlement by negotiation or legal controversy as if the money had not been turned over by the one to the other. In dismissing motions, actions, bills in equity, and appeals ‘without prejudice,’ no right or remedy of the parties is affected. The use of the phrase simply shows that there has been no decision of the case upon the merits, and prevents defendant from setting up the defense of res adjudicata. In other words it leaves the whole subject as open to litigation as if no proceeding had ever been had in the matter.” 40 Cyclopedia of Law and Procedure 2130–31(William Mack ed., 1912). Black’s Law Dictionary (11th ed. 2019)
Now with all of this in place start using correct language. And also, look things up. Do your due diligence and stop taking what people say as the gospel. Even look up the thing I discuss. You will never become competent if you are relying on others and their words. God bless you all.