Daniel Berlin wrote:
>
> On Friday, January 3, 2003, at 01:29 AM, Brian Behlendorf wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 3 Jan 2003, Greg Hudson wrote:
> >> If we put "2000-2003" in files which were created after 2000, as well
> >> as
> >> files which were not modified in 2003, then we're documenting
> >> falsehoods, though not terribly important ones.
> >
> > I've always kinda wondered about ranges... why not just put "2003"?
> > It's
> > OK that some of that file was written before 2003; there are presumably
> > copies of it floating about with that older date.
> >
> I'm not a lawyer, this isn't legal advice (sorry, I know it's annoying,
> but the various bar's are very touchy on the subject of "Unauthorized
> practice of law")
>
> As Yoda might say:
> Later dates does often invalid a notice make.
>
> Invalid notice = easier to claim you are an innocent infringer.
>
> Don't bother putting an incorrect notice on files. Either use a correct
> one, or you are wasting your time.
> You don't want to try to defend an invalid notice as valid in court.
> You'll lose.
Doesn't this all get very complicated if you start copying functions
from one file to another?
Say you have
file1.c created and copyrighted in 1999
and
file2.c created and copyrighted in 2000
In 2001 you move the function file1() from file1.c to file2.c. file1()
was initially copyrighted in 1999, so what does the copyright in file2
become? Do you need to back the date to 1999?
Also, is it a good or bad idea to update the copyright year in files
even though there were no other changes made to them? Does the new
copyright year only become "valid" when a change is made to the file
in the new year?
Best,
Blair
--
Blair Zajac <blair@orcaware.com>
Plots of your system's performance - http://www.orcaware.com/orca/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Fri Jan 3 08:18:33 2003