4 messages, 2 authors, 2016-06-15 · open the first message on its own page
From: Junio C Hamano <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:48:02
David Aguilar [off-list ref] writes:
-# Copyright (c) 2009 David Aguilar +# Copyright (c) 2009-2010 David Aguilar
Just a very minor issue. I'd prefer to see: Copyright (c) 2008, 2009, 2010 over Copyright (c) 2008-2010 Copyright lawyers may say parenthesized-c does not have any legal meaning and must be circle-c, but I am not a lawyer.
From: Bill Lear <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:48:02
On Friday, January 15, 2010 at 11:46:32 (-0800) Junio C Hamano writes:
David Aguilar [off-list ref] writes:quoted
-# Copyright (c) 2009 David Aguilar +# Copyright (c) 2009-2010 David AguilarJust a very minor issue. I'd prefer to see: Copyright (c) 2008, 2009, 2010 over Copyright (c) 2008-2010
Why? Bill
From: Junio C Hamano <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:48:02
Bill Lear [off-list ref] writes:
On Friday, January 15, 2010 at 11:46:32 (-0800) Junio C Hamano writes:quoted
David Aguilar [off-list ref] writes:quoted
-# Copyright (c) 2009 David Aguilar +# Copyright (c) 2009-2010 David AguilarJust a very minor issue. I'd prefer to see: Copyright (c) 2008, 2009, 2010 over Copyright (c) 2008-2010Why?
I learned this from <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-howto.html>. The advice doesn't say _why_, but my understanding of the rationale behind it is that the international convention that governs this copyright notice specifically mentions "the year of publication", not "range of years" (UCC Geneva text, Sept. 06, 1952, Article III 1.). Berne convention does not require such a copyright notice, and many countries are signatories of both treaties, so the whole copyright notice may be a moot point in many countries, but it matters in some. As long as the file (and the GNU advice cited above) is being cautious by having the notice, it would be better to be equally cautious and spell the years of publication out. But I am not a lawyer.
From: Bill Lear <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:48:02
On Friday, January 15, 2010 at 17:05:17 (-0800) Junio C Hamano writes:
Bill Lear [off-list ref] writes:quoted
On Friday, January 15, 2010 at 11:46:32 (-0800) Junio C Hamano writes:quoted
David Aguilar [off-list ref] writes:quoted
-# Copyright (c) 2009 David Aguilar +# Copyright (c) 2009-2010 David AguilarJust a very minor issue. I'd prefer to see: Copyright (c) 2008, 2009, 2010 over Copyright (c) 2008-2010Why?I learned this from <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-howto.html>. The advice doesn't say _why_, but my understanding of the rationale behind it is that the international convention that governs this copyright notice specifically mentions "the year of publication", not "range of years" (UCC Geneva text, Sept. 06, 1952, Article III 1.). Berne convention does not require such a copyright notice, and many countries are signatories of both treaties, so the whole copyright notice may be a moot point in many countries, but it matters in some. As long as the file (and the GNU advice cited above) is being cautious by having the notice, it would be better to be equally cautious and spell the years of publication out. But I am not a lawyer.
Hmm, interesting. My wife is a lawyer, maybe I'll sic her on this. My guess is that if this came to court, a judge would laugh at anyone who tried to assert a meaningful difference. Good to know though, thank you for taking the time to explain this. Bill