On Thursday 01 January 2009 15:28:51 Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> > On Thu, 2009-01-01 at 14:47 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > Andrew Chernow wrote:
> > > > Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > > > Greg Stark wrote:
> > > > >> Is that actually legal if we haven't modified the files? Or is the
> > > > >> whole source tree considiered one work?
> > > > >
> > > > > One work, I assume.
> > > >
> > > > I am not a lawyer, but if its one work, why is there a notice in
> > > > every source file? ISTM that if it were one work there would only
> > > > have to be one notice.
> > >
> > > Because people often take source files and copy them for use in other
> > > projects.
> >
> > I think the correct resolution to the question is to ask legal. Yes?
>
> So I can get three different answers? It is not a priority for me.
>
Nor does it need to be... copyright for organizations runs ~ 100 years, so a
year here or there is unlikely to make much difference to any of us. (Though
for future generations, we'd probably have been better off not having a
copyright notice at all).
--
Robert Treat
Conjecture: http://www.xzilla.net
Consulting: http://www.omniti.com
