[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: copyright vs. license

> > Shouldn't you include a year?
> It's not required. And I get bored by updating them.

The year should be included.  Here is a reference: 

An excerpt:
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.

Example: © 2002 John Doe 

David Renie

Reply to: