commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Emmanuel Bourg <>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Promote Configuration to Commons Proper
Date Thu, 18 Dec 2003 11:59:26 GMT
I think there are 2 copyright statements mixed here :

- the copyright of the ASF license since it's a copyrighted document 
from the Apache Foundation. The date on the ASF license shouldn't be 
changed, except when it's adapted for a specific component (the "you 
must not reuse the project/product name" condition). For example the GPL 
license is copyrighted by the FSF with a date set to 1989, 1991 and this 
is never changed by projects released under the GPL (and actually they 
can't change it since the license of the GPL doesn't allow modifitions).

- the copyright statement of the file, i.e. the date of its 
creation/modification and the author of the code. I believe every 
contributor retains the copyright on the code submitted but may assign 
it to the ASF. I guess that's what happens most of the time and would 
explain why a single copyright statement serves 2 purposes.

Emmanuel Bourg

Eric Pugh wrote:

> Re: [VOTE] Promote Configuration to Commons ProperSo, what is the deal with
> copyright, everytime it changes we need to update the date?  I don't think
> anyone pays attention to it on a day to day basis..  Sounds like we need
> something like a maven plugin that checks each file, and if it has changed
> post whatever the copyright date is, then updates it...
> Eric
>   -----Original Message-----
>   From: Emmanuel Bourg []
>   Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2003 11:28 AM
>   To: Jakarta Commons Developers List
>   Subject: Re: [VOTE] Promote Configuration to Commons Proper
>   robert burrell donkin wrote:
>   > i did happen to notice that some of the licenses have copyright ending
>   > in 2002.
>   Actually the copyright doesn't end in 2002 but starts in 2002, it's then
>   valid for the lifetime of the author plus a minimum of 50 years after
>   his death according to the Berne Convention.
>   You are right though that some content submitted or modified this year
>   doesn't have a copyright assigned in 2003.
>   Emmanuel Bourg

View raw message