From: Michael Phipps <mphipps1@ro...> - 2002-07-24 01:18:31
>From: "David Reid" <mail@...>
>Subject: Re: [Open-beos-kernel-devel]Openbeos kernel and copyright
>Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 17:56:04 +0100
>I disagree here. I think we should simply have our own header we add to
>theirs, not subsume it into ours.
> * Original License:
> * Copyright 2001, Travis Geiselbrecht. All rights reserved.
> * Distributed under the terms of the NewOS License.
> * New license:
> * Copyright 2002 OpenBeOS All rights reserved
> * Distributed under the terms of the MIT license
I can certainly live with this.
>Also I think we should simply have Copyright OpenBeOS instead of showing the
>year, or every year we have to go through and change all the files...
In the US, it very much seems to be standard practice. It might not be required, but
I have a tough time believing that all of the companies that I have worked for would
do it without it being necessary.
>However, before we do anything I think we should talk with some more people
>to make sure we follow best practise.
And, in truth, I don't think that it makes two hoots of differnece (that is different from a woot).
It isn't like we will actually ever go after someone for copyright infringement. I mean - we
*GIVE* everyone almost every right that someone could ask for. ;-)