On 31/05/06, Henri Yandell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Wed, 31 May 2006, Henri Yandell wrote: > > > On Wed, 31 May 2006, Martin Cooper wrote: > >> On 5/31/06, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>> I updated the stylesheet to change the Copyright statement from >>> 1999-2005 to 1999-2006 a week or so ago. >>> >>> Of course this changes all the generated HTML pages. >>> >>> I've not yet updated them, as I wanted to double-check if this was >>> needed or not (the stylesheet could be changed back). >>> >>> OR: would it be better to just change the copyright in files that have >>> been updated this year? >> >> >> s/better/required/g. >> >> In other words, the copyright years in a file must include only the years >> in >> which that file was modified. > > Not sure if it's required for the sites. I suspect the concept of templating > is perfectly acceptable and the copyright can be considered to refer to the > whole site and not just the page in question. > > Worth a legal-discuss question. As he IM'd me, I took the liberty of unleashing this question on Cliff. You'll be surprised by the result of the conversation - drop the copyright from the footer and just update the copyright on the legal info page. Sounds good to me. Less to maintain.
+1
All that having the copyright on each page does is provide a defense against an "innocent infringement defence" - which apparantly means when someone says they didn't know they were doing wrong. Not keeping the copyright up to date means that it'll expire in 93 years not 95, so not even a huge deal to worry about keeping it up to date. How does that sound?
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
