On Mon, Feb 14, 2005 at 08:01:09AM -0700, Lares Moreau wrote: > However, there is no need to systematically change the notice in every > old file."
This is true, but for collective works we can apply the same notice on all participating works (although each individual work can also have an additional, individual notice). We use this for the website - the Gentoo website is a collective work which is applied a notice by our stylesheet (guide.xsl). Perhaps something similar is valid for the entire Portage tree (as a single ebuild is hardly usable). But as mentioned elsewhere in this thread, we might want to look at other projects with the same distribution model. I don't know why ranges are even applied generally, but honestly, I believe they're better: Copyright 1999 - 2005 Gentoo Foundation versus Copyright 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005 Gentoo Foundation Lawfully, I believe only the initial year is required (1999 in the example). This is covered by the "Omission of Notice" or "Error in notice" parts of the copyright directive. http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ03.html has some information on this. Ianal though, just lurking on the I'net. Wkr, Sven Vermeulen -- Documentation & PR project leader The Gentoo Project <<< http://www.gentoo.org >>>
pgpe9pgsAxPxp.pgp
Description: PGP signature
