Open daxim opened 11 years ago
karenetheridge
commented
11 years ago iirc someone also requested (via Software::License) that a range of years be supported as well, so things that generate the LICENSE (for example) can say "copyright 2007 - 2013".
daxim
commented
11 years ago A range is fine, too.
dagolden
commented
11 years ago @daxim, as I say to most spec enhancement requests, start with "x_copyright" and work out the semantics and see if you can get widespread adoption. If so, then it makes a good case to be made official whenever v3 happens.
However, keep in mind that a copyright notice is not required (at least by the US Copyright Office):
What is a copyright notice? How do I put a copyright notice on my work? A copyright notice is an identifier placed on copies of the work to inform the world of copyright ownership. The copyright notice generally consists of the symbol or word “copyright (or copr.),” the name of the copyright owner, and the year of first publication, e.g., ©2008 John Doe. While use of a copyright notice was once required as a condition of copyright protection, it is now optional. Use of the notice is the responsibility of the copyright owner and does not require advance permission from, or registration with, the Copyright Office. See Circular 3, Copyright Notice, for requirements for works published before March 1, 1989, and for more information on the form and position of the copyright notice.
Note that it says "year of first publication". So I would encourage people towards that instead of ranges.
Conveniently, I generate it in my dzil dist.ini when I first create a distribution and then never have to touch it.
kenahoo
commented
11 years ago Note that it says "year of first publication". So I would encourage people towards that instead of ranges.
I believe the Copyright Office is talking mainly about more static works like books, where reprintings don't change the content much. For code that evolves over time, my opinion is that ranges make sense.
Leont
commented
11 years ago I believe the Copyright Office is talking mainly about more static works like books, where reprintings don't change the content much. For code that evolves over time, my opinion is that ranges make sense.
Copyright terms in most of the western world expires 70 years after the author's death. With a bit of luck, most code we write today won't expire until the 22nd century. The details don't really matter.
Though I see no reason to restrict authors from using ranges if they really want to.
I would like to consume the copyright year from the meta file, real life use case: https://metacpan.org/source/DAM/DhMakePerl-0.79/lib/DhMakePerl/Command/Packaging.pm#L983
Authoring systems like Dist::Zilla or Module::Starter already provide the year, but currently only for purposes of rendering documentation boiler-plate from which it's difficult to extract. Therefore in order to stream-line automated packaging I propose to amend the spec with the copyright year.