From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/41425 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Russ Allbery Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: Time to update the copyrights? Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 08:09:53 -0800 Organization: The Eyrie Sender: owner-ding@hpc.uh.edu Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035176821 6019 80.91.224.250 (21 Oct 2002 05:07:01 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 05:07:01 +0000 (UTC) Return-Path: Original-Received: (qmail 25601 invoked from network); 2 Jan 2002 16:10:51 -0000 Original-Received: from malifon.math.uh.edu (mail@129.7.128.13) by mastaler.com with SMTP; 2 Jan 2002 16:10:51 -0000 Original-Received: from sina.hpc.uh.edu ([129.7.128.10] ident=lists) by malifon.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 3.20 #1) id 16Lny7-0003q9-00; Wed, 02 Jan 2002 10:10:19 -0600 Original-Received: by sina.hpc.uh.edu (TLB v0.09a (1.20 tibbs 1996/10/09 22:03:07)); Wed, 02 Jan 2002 10:10:10 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: from sclp3.sclp.com (qmailr@sclp3.sclp.com [209.196.61.66]) by sina.hpc.uh.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id KAA23685 for ; Wed, 2 Jan 2002 10:10:00 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: (qmail 25591 invoked by alias); 2 Jan 2002 16:10:02 -0000 Original-Received: (qmail 25584 invoked from network); 2 Jan 2002 16:10:01 -0000 Original-Received: from windlord.stanford.edu (171.64.13.23) by gnus.org with SMTP; 2 Jan 2002 16:10:01 -0000 Original-Received: (qmail 20507 invoked by uid 50); 2 Jan 2002 16:09:53 -0000 Original-To: ding@gnus.org In-Reply-To: (Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen's message of "Wed, 02 Jan 2002 16:00:47 +0100") Original-Lines: 19 User-Agent: Gnus/5.090004 (Oort Gnus v0.04) XEmacs/21.4 (Common Lisp, sparc-sun-solaris2.6) Precedence: list X-Majordomo: 1.94.jlt7 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:41425 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:41425 Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen writes: > merlyn@stonehenge.com (Randal L. Schwartz) writes: >> That would also be the only legal way. :) Otherwise, you're getting a >> copyright extension on something that isn't substantially different, >> and could be used to challenge the copyright authority completely. > But does that mean that the copyright should only be updated if the > change is substantial? If I edit two or three lines, then the copyright > shouldn't be updated? Yup, unfortunately. That's my understanding. It's not clear how important it is to be very precise in the copyright notices, but the GNU coding standards are pretty specific about what years should and should not go into the list. -- Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu)