Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2012 16:24:36 -0800 From: Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org> To: Jung-uk Kim <jkim@FreeBSD.org> Cc: "svn-src-head@freebsd.org" <svn-src-head@freebsd.org>, "svn-src-all@freebsd.org" <svn-src-all@freebsd.org>, "src-committers@freebsd.org" <src-committers@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: svn commit: r232065 - head/sys/dev/fb Message-ID: <4F46D8C4.2030401@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <201202231917.32499.jkim@FreeBSD.org> References: <201202231916.q1NJG5Oj019386@svn.freebsd.org> <4F46CAC0.5030501@FreeBSD.org> <201202231917.32499.jkim@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 02/23/2012 16:17, Jung-uk Kim wrote:
> I remember there were some discussions in developers@ that
> "2009-2012" is more appropriate than "2009, 2010, 2012" or
> "2009-2010, 2012", if my memory serves. Anyone?
"2009, 2010, 2012" is as synonym for "2009-2010, 2012" and I see it both
ways. That's not the issue. (However, if it were 2008-2010 that is
generally preferred vs. listing all 3 years individually.)
The issue is that it's a basic tenet of copyright law that you cannot
claim copyright in a year that you didn't actually make any changes.
This makes sense if you think about it ... your rights from the last
year you changed something don't expire at the end of that year, and if
you didn't make changes in 2011 you don't have any new material that
needs protection.
For instance:
Copyright 1979, 1980, 1983, 1986, 1988, 1989, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994
The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved.
Doug
--
It's always a long day; 86400 doesn't fit into a short.
Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS.
Yours for the right price. :) http://SupersetSolutions.com/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4F46D8C4.2030401>