Re: Why not simplify Copyright at boot/dmesg?
On Sat, 23 Feb 2013 16:47:10 +0100, vermaden wrote: Why not simplify that: | Copyright (c) 1992-2013 The FreeBSD Project. | Copyright (c) 1979, 1980, 1983, 1986, 1988, 1989, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994 | The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved. | FreeBSD is a registered trademark of The FreeBSD Foundation. | (...) ... into that: | Copyright (c) 1992-2013 The FreeBSD Project. | Copyright (c) 1979-1994 The Regents of the University of California. | FreeBSD is a registered trademark of The FreeBSD Foundation. | (...) Because you need to exclude 1981, 1982, 1984, 1985, 1987 and 1990 which are missing in list of years. :-) -- Polytropon Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why not simplify Copyright at boot/dmesg?
Od: Polytropon free...@edvax.de Do: vermaden verma...@interia.pl; Wysłane: 17:11 Sobota 2013-02-23 Temat: Re: Why not simplify Copyright at boot/dmesg? On Sat, 23 Feb 2013 16:47:10 +0100, vermaden wrote: Why not simplify that: | Copyright (c) 1992-2013 The FreeBSD Project. | Copyright (c) 1979, 1980, 1983, 1986, 1988, 1989, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994 | The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved. | FreeBSD is a registered trademark of The FreeBSD Foundation. | (...) ... into that: | Copyright (c) 1992-2013 The FreeBSD Project. | Copyright (c) 1979-1994 The Regents of the University of California. | FreeBSD is a registered trademark of The FreeBSD Foundation. | (...) Because you need to exclude 1981, 1982, 1984, 1985, 1987 and 1990 which are missing in list of years. :-) It may sound like ignorance, but why we need to exclude them? We do not exclude any years for FreeBSD Project ;) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why not simplify Copyright at boot/dmesg?
On Sat, 23 Feb 2013 18:14:48 +0100, vermaden wrote: Od: Polytropon free...@edvax.de Do: vermaden verma...@interia.pl; Wysłane: 17:11 Sobota 2013-02-23 Temat: Re: Why not simplify Copyright at boot/dmesg? On Sat, 23 Feb 2013 16:47:10 +0100, vermaden wrote: Why not simplify that: | Copyright (c) 1992-2013 The FreeBSD Project. | Copyright (c) 1979, 1980, 1983, 1986, 1988, 1989, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994 | The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved. | FreeBSD is a registered trademark of The FreeBSD Foundation. | (...) ... into that: | Copyright (c) 1992-2013 The FreeBSD Project. | Copyright (c) 1979-1994 The Regents of the University of California. | FreeBSD is a registered trademark of The FreeBSD Foundation. | (...) Because you need to exclude 1981, 1982, 1984, 1985, 1987 and 1990 which are missing in list of years. :-) It may sound like ignorance, but why we need to exclude them? To be honest: I have no idea. It's just that I noticed this at first sight. I would assume there is some specific legal sense behind this naming and counting convention; two lawyers, three opinions might apply. :-) We do not exclude any years for FreeBSD Project ;) But The FreeBSD Project as a copyright holder covers a different time frame than The Regents of the University of California, so this seems to be some specific difference causing two lines of copyright information. -- Polytropon Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why not simplify Copyright at boot/dmesg?
On Sat, 23 Feb 2013 17:11:50 +0100 Polytropon free...@edvax.de wrote: On Sat, 23 Feb 2013 16:47:10 +0100, vermaden wrote: Why not simplify that: | Copyright (c) 1992-2013 The FreeBSD Project. | Copyright (c) 1979, 1980, 1983, 1986, 1988, 1989, 1991, 1992, 1993, | 1994 The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved. | FreeBSD is a registered trademark of The FreeBSD Foundation. | (...) ... into that: | Copyright (c) 1992-2013 The FreeBSD Project. | Copyright (c) 1979-1994 The Regents of the University of California. | FreeBSD is a registered trademark of The FreeBSD Foundation. | (...) Because you need to exclude 1981, 1982, 1984, 1985, 1987 and 1990 which are missing in list of years. :-) There's that, also that copyright message belongs to the Regents of the University of California and unless I misremember one of the license conditions is retaining their copyright notice - altering it would probably be a license violation. -- Steve O'Hara-Smith st...@sohara.org ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why not simplify Copyright at boot/dmesg?
On 02/23/13 12:32, Steve O'Hara-Smith wrote: On Sat, 23 Feb 2013 17:11:50 +0100 Polytropon free...@edvax.de wrote: On Sat, 23 Feb 2013 16:47:10 +0100, vermaden wrote: Why not simplify that: | Copyright (c) 1992-2013 The FreeBSD Project. | Copyright (c) 1979, 1980, 1983, 1986, 1988, 1989, 1991, 1992, 1993, | 1994 The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved. | FreeBSD is a registered trademark of The FreeBSD Foundation. | (...) ... into that: | Copyright (c) 1992-2013 The FreeBSD Project. | Copyright (c) 1979-1994 The Regents of the University of California. | FreeBSD is a registered trademark of The FreeBSD Foundation. | (...) Because you need to exclude 1981, 1982, 1984, 1985, 1987 and 1990 which are missing in list of years. :-) There's that, also that copyright message belongs to the Regents of the University of California and unless I misremember one of the license conditions is retaining their copyright notice - altering it would probably be a license violation. It seems the regents copyright claims end in 1994. Perhaps some underlying piece of code is still in FreeBSD requiring this notice? -- Yours in Christ, Joseph A Nagy Jr Whoever loves instruction loves knowledge, But he who hates correction is stupid. -- Proverbs 12:1 Emails are not formal business letters, whatever businesses may want. Original content CopyFree (F) under the OWL http://copyfree.org/licenses/owl/license.txt ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why not simplify Copyright at boot/dmesg?
On 2/23/2013 1:10 PM, Joseph A. Nagy, Jr wrote: On 02/23/13 12:32, Steve O'Hara-Smith wrote: On Sat, 23 Feb 2013 17:11:50 +0100 Polytropon free...@edvax.de wrote: On Sat, 23 Feb 2013 16:47:10 +0100, vermaden wrote: Why not simplify that: | Copyright (c) 1992-2013 The FreeBSD Project. | Copyright (c) 1979, 1980, 1983, 1986, 1988, 1989, 1991, 1992, 1993, | 1994 The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved. | FreeBSD is a registered trademark of The FreeBSD Foundation. | (...) ... into that: | Copyright (c) 1992-2013 The FreeBSD Project. | Copyright (c) 1979-1994 The Regents of the University of California. | FreeBSD is a registered trademark of The FreeBSD Foundation. | (...) Because you need to exclude 1981, 1982, 1984, 1985, 1987 and 1990 which are missing in list of years. :-) Copyright counts for published years. Look at the copyright on a book that's not a first edition, try classic children's books. They'll list several years decades apart. If nothing was published in 1983, there's no new copyright for that year. In 2077, what was released in 1982 will be public domain, and nothing more until 2079. There's that, also that copyright message belongs to the Regents of the University of California and unless I misremember one of the license conditions is retaining their copyright notice - altering it would probably be a license violation. It seems the regents copyright claims end in 1994. Perhaps some underlying piece of code is still in FreeBSD requiring this notice? Perhaps the creation of FreeBSD and the release of 4.4BSD? Nothing from Berkley's been added, so no new copyright. There's little need to incorporate later patches to 4.4BSD because divergences between the 4.4BSD and FreeBSD. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why not simplify Copyright at boot/dmesg?
On 02/23/13 15:33, Joshua Isom wrote: On 2/23/2013 1:10 PM, Joseph A. Nagy, Jr wrote: snip It seems the regents copyright claims end in 1994. Perhaps some underlying piece of code is still in FreeBSD requiring this notice? Perhaps the creation of FreeBSD and the release of 4.4BSD? Nothing from Berkley's been added, so no new copyright. There's little need to incorporate later patches to 4.4BSD because divergences between the 4.4BSD and FreeBSD. Not that I find it an issue, but could whatever is left over be removed? Just a thought, not a concern. -- Yours in Christ, Joseph A Nagy Jr Whoever loves instruction loves knowledge, But he who hates correction is stupid. -- Proverbs 12:1 Emails are not formal business letters, whatever businesses may want. Original content CopyFree (F) under the OWL http://copyfree.org/licenses/owl/license.txt ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why not simplify Copyright at boot/dmesg?
Thank You all for explanations, it seems logical now ;) Regards, vermaden ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why not simplify Copyright at boot/dmesg?
On Sat, 23 Feb 2013 15:56:46 -0600 Joseph A. Nagy, Jr jnagyjr1...@gmail.com wrote: On 02/23/13 15:33, Joshua Isom wrote: On 2/23/2013 1:10 PM, Joseph A. Nagy, Jr wrote: snip It seems the regents copyright claims end in 1994. Perhaps some underlying piece of code is still in FreeBSD requiring this notice? Perhaps the creation of FreeBSD and the release of 4.4BSD? Nothing from Berkley's been added, so no new copyright. There's little need to incorporate later patches to 4.4BSD because divergences between the 4.4BSD and FreeBSD. It's even simpler than that 4.4 BSD Lite2 was the final release from Berkeley CSRG in 1994. There have been no later patches to 4.4BSD from Berkeley, that was the last release of any kind from CSRG. FreeBSD 2.0 was based on 4.4-Lite, the updates in Lite2 were merged in pretty quickly IIRC. Not that I find it an issue, but could whatever is left over be removed? Just a thought, not a concern. I can't think why anyone would want to, and I expect there's a *lot* left over, certainly their copyright notice appears in many files in /usr/src. -- Steve O'Hara-Smith st...@sohara.org ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why not simplify Copyright at boot/dmesg?
On 2/23/2013 4:23 PM, Steve O'Hara-Smith wrote: On Sat, 23 Feb 2013 15:56:46 -0600 Joseph A. Nagy, Jr jnagyjr1...@gmail.com wrote: On 02/23/13 15:33, Joshua Isom wrote: On 2/23/2013 1:10 PM, Joseph A. Nagy, Jr wrote: snip It seems the regents copyright claims end in 1994. Perhaps some underlying piece of code is still in FreeBSD requiring this notice? Perhaps the creation of FreeBSD and the release of 4.4BSD? Nothing from Berkley's been added, so no new copyright. There's little need to incorporate later patches to 4.4BSD because divergences between the 4.4BSD and FreeBSD. It's even simpler than that 4.4 BSD Lite2 was the final release from Berkeley CSRG in 1994. There have been no later patches to 4.4BSD from Berkeley, that was the last release of any kind from CSRG. FreeBSD 2.0 was based on 4.4-Lite, the updates in Lite2 were merged in pretty quickly IIRC. It would matter when it was released, not merged. If it was merged in 1996 but the code was released in 1994, the copyright's still 1994. Not that I find it an issue, but could whatever is left over be removed? Just a thought, not a concern. I can't think why anyone would want to, and I expect there's a *lot* left over, certainly their copyright notice appears in many files in /usr/src. That also ties in with NIH syndrome. Gnu does that a lot just to make sure they can change to GPLv4 without problems, while Linux is still GPLv2. It's also not just Berkeley, but other people and organizations hold copyrights. From a quick glance, netatalk is by the University of Michigan. Mounting a cd using cd9660, which is still listed as Berkeley, is probably so tested and proven by now, that there would be no benefit to rewriting it other than to change the copyright. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why not simplify Copyright at boot/dmesg?
On 23/02/2013 23:17, Joshua Isom wrote: That also ties in with NIH syndrome. Gnu does that a lot just to make sure they can change to GPLv4 without problems, while Linux is still GPLv2. It's also not just Berkeley, but other people and organizations hold copyrights. From a quick glance, netatalk is by the University of Michigan. Mounting a cd using cd9660, which is still listed as Berkeley, is probably so tested and proven by now, that there would be no benefit to rewriting it other than to change the copyright. Other open source projects require contributors to sign copyright assignment agreements so all the code is under a single owner. -- Bruce Cran ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
