From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31040 invoked by alias); 28 Feb 2014 18:22:18 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 31013 invoked by uid 89); 28 Feb 2014 18:22:17 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-Spam-User: qpsmtpd, 2 recipients X-HELO: relay1.mentorg.com Received: from relay1.mentorg.com (HELO relay1.mentorg.com) (192.94.38.131) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Fri, 28 Feb 2014 18:22:16 +0000 Received: from svr-orw-fem-01.mgc.mentorg.com ([147.34.98.93]) by relay1.mentorg.com with esmtp id 1WJS4a-0004pW-17 from joseph_myers@mentor.com ; Fri, 28 Feb 2014 10:22:12 -0800 Received: from SVR-IES-FEM-01.mgc.mentorg.com ([137.202.0.104]) by svr-orw-fem-01.mgc.mentorg.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Fri, 28 Feb 2014 10:22:11 -0800 Received: from digraph.polyomino.org.uk (137.202.0.76) by SVR-IES-FEM-01.mgc.mentorg.com (137.202.0.104) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.2.247.3; Fri, 28 Feb 2014 18:22:09 +0000 Received: from jsm28 (helo=localhost) by digraph.polyomino.org.uk with local-esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1WJS4W-0004Iz-3B; Fri, 28 Feb 2014 18:22:08 +0000 Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2014 18:22:00 -0000 From: "Joseph S. Myers" To: Joel Brobecker CC: , , Subject: Re: copyright dates in binutils (and includes/) In-Reply-To: <20140228130844.GA4893@adacore.com> Message-ID: References: <20140227045011.GC14922@bubble.grove.modra.org> <20140227132551.GO4348@adacore.com> <20140228085652.GI14922@bubble.grove.modra.org> <20140228130844.GA4893@adacore.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" X-SW-Source: 2014-02/txt/msg00878.txt.bz2 On Fri, 28 Feb 2014, Joel Brobecker wrote: > > Joseph, do you know why implicitly adding years to the claimed > > copyright years is a problem? I'm guessing the file needs to be > > published somewhere for each year claimed. > > IANAL, but from 2 discussions with copyright-clerk: > > 1. We start claiming copyright the year the file as committed > to a medium (hard drive), not the year it was published. I don't think it counts unless the version in question got published at some point. The question is about versions that weren't published at the time, but were published later when the version control history was released. There was a discussion on bug-standards starting Jan 2012. Karl's revised wording from 11 May 2012 seems to indicate that if a version was committed to a version control history that was later released, the dates from that history count as copyrightable years (so reducing the number of cases where it may not be possible to fill in gaps) - but that revised wording doesn't seem to have been committed. -- Joseph S. Myers joseph@codesourcery.com