www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From John Selbie <j...@selbie.com>
Subject Re: Updating source files with copyright dates
Date Fri, 20 Jan 2012 23:14:31 GMT
Thanks Ralph.

I'm inclined to use the following quote from that document as guidance:

"the year date of first publication of the compilation or derivative work
is sufficient"

Form of Notice for Visually Perceptible Copies

The notice for visually perceptible copies should contain all the following
three elements:

1 The symbol © (the letter C in a circle), or the word “Copyright,” or the
abbreviation “Copr.”; and

2 The year of first publication of the work. In the case of compilations or
derivative works incorporating previously published material, the year date
of first publication of the compilation or derivative work is sufficient.
The year date may be omitted where a pictorial, graphic, or sculptural
work, with accompanying textual matter, if any, is reproduced in or on
greeting cards, postcards, stationery, jewelry, dolls, toys, or any useful
article; and 3 The name of the owner of copyright in the work, or an
abbreviation by which the name can be recognized, or a generally known
alternative designation of the owner.

On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 1:40 PM, ralph.goers @dslextreme.com <
ralph.goers@dslextreme.com> wrote:

> No. See http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ1.pdf. You should only change
> the copyright for the things you modify. My understanding is that an
> inaccurate date can invalidate your copyright as the length of the
> copyright is determined for the date of first publication. When you make
> changes only those changes start from the new date.
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 11:22 PM, John Selbie <john@selbie.com> wrote:
>> Greetings,
>> I would have thought the following question would be in an FAQ
>> somewhere, but I could not find it.
>> Last year, I released an open source project with code on github under
>> the Apache 2.0 license. (A stun server code base at
>> https://github.com/jselbie/stunserver ). All the code distributed was
>> written by me.
>> As per the instructions in the Appendix of the Apache 2.0 license, all
>> the code source files were updated with the following text at the top:
>> /*
>>   Copyright 2011 John Selbie
>>   Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
>>   you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
>>   You may obtain a copy of the License at
>>       http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
>>   Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
>>   distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
>>   WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
>>   See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
>>   limitations under the License.
>> */
>> So here's my simple question.  It's now 2012.  I'm about to release an
>> update to the code base. Do I need to change the copyright year of
>> each source file to say "2012" instead of "2011" (or it is "2011,2012"
>> or "2011-2012") ?
>> Thanks,
>> John Selbie
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org

View raw message