From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-return-27618-listarch-gdb=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 24288 invoked by alias); 1 Feb 2007 09:44:17 -0000
Received: (qmail 24280 invoked by uid 22791); 1 Feb 2007 09:44:16 -0000
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from nile.gnat.com (HELO nile.gnat.com) (205.232.38.5)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 01 Feb 2007 09:44:12 +0000
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) 	by filtered-nile.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63F0448D086; 	Thu,  1 Feb 2007 04:44:10 -0500 (EST)
Received: from nile.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1])  by localhost (nile.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP  id 15587-01-4; Thu,  1 Feb 2007 04:44:10 -0500 (EST)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (nile.gnat.com [205.232.38.5]) 	by nile.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DB1548CE0F; 	Thu,  1 Feb 2007 04:44:09 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <45C1B66A.3010909@adacore.com>
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 09:44:00 -0000
From: Robert Dewar <dewar@adacore.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.9 (Windows/20061207)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Nicholas Mc Guire <der.herr@hofr.at>
CC: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>,   veenu khanna <veenu_khanna@yahoo.com>,   gdb@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: GDB Stub & GPL question
References: <256227.64036.qm@web53809.mail.yahoo.com> <20070131150448.GA24917@nevyn.them.org> <Pine.LNX.4.60.0701311911270.1759@rtl14.hofr.at> <45C13E66.6040608@adacore.com> <Pine.LNX.4.60.0702010531210.1722@rtl14.hofr.at>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.60.0702010531210.1722@rtl14.hofr.at>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2007-02/txt/msg00002.txt.bz2

Nicholas Mc Guire wrote:

> Never the less it would make sense to change these boilerplates if they
> do not provide any legally relevant information as they do lead to 
> confusion when read by some people (me atleast).

Absolutely, it is appropriate that headers be right. Even if copyright
notices are no longer a legal requirement, they should be present and
correct (and the copyright office thinks they may be relevant in an
"innocent infringement" defense which might mitigate damages, see

http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ03.html