Comments on: Eternally Up To Date Copyrights http://www.kennycarlile.com/2007/07/25/eternally-up-to-date-copyrights/ Use Only Genuine Interocitor Parts Thu, 19 Aug 2010 08:35:15 +0000 hourly 1 By: Kenny http://www.kennycarlile.com/2007/07/25/eternally-up-to-date-copyrights/comment-page-1/#comment-79 Kenny Thu, 26 Jul 2007 16:10:54 +0000 http://kennycarlile.com/2007/07/25/eternally-up-to-date-copyrights/#comment-79 Yeah, I think you're right about the copyright year (or more specifically, the copyright date) needing to reflect the work's actual creation or modification date. However, the type of copyright I'm talking about is like the one you see in the footer of this site. I think of it more as a site copyright rather than an individual work copyright. That is, the copyright refers to the concept, layout, etc. The intent is more of a copyright of the overall site, not the content on a specific page. Following your logic, which I agree with, I should also have a copyright near that contained work that refers to the copyright of the specific content. ...like I'm about to do here. :o) ©2007 Yeah, I think you're right about the copyright year (or more specifically, the copyright date) needing to reflect the work's actual creation or modification date. However, the type of copyright I'm talking about is like the one you see in the footer of this site.

I think of it more as a site copyright rather than an individual work copyright. That is, the copyright refers to the concept, layout, etc. The intent is more of a copyright of the overall site, not the content on a specific page.

Following your logic, which I agree with, I should also have a copyright near that contained work that refers to the copyright of the specific content. …like I'm about to do here. :o ) ©2007

]]> By: ValkRaider http://www.kennycarlile.com/2007/07/25/eternally-up-to-date-copyrights/comment-page-1/#comment-78 ValkRaider Thu, 26 Jul 2007 15:27:03 +0000 http://kennycarlile.com/2007/07/25/eternally-up-to-date-copyrights/#comment-78 Wouldn't updating the copyright date when you haven't updated the content actually be legally questionable? Also, in some cases it might be more appropriate to maintain the older copyright date to help establish "prior art" type claims. Ideally the copyright date should only change when content is changed, not when content is viewed. Perhaps a way to have the copyright reflect the last modification date of the file or some such process... Or I could just be making all this up. But heck, with copyrights in the USA now lasting 72 billion years (or 144 billion years if you are Disney) - what is the real reason to make sure that your copyright stays up to date? In fact, your "Copyright 1993" web pages simply add authenticity and a "retro" feel - while the copyright is still legally enforceable. Heck, nothing makes you more "l33t" than having a web page you published back when the web was ALLCAPS and blink tags, you know, back when Yahoo was still useful. Wouldn't updating the copyright date when you haven't updated the content actually be legally questionable?

Also, in some cases it might be more appropriate to maintain the older copyright date to help establish "prior art" type claims.

Ideally the copyright date should only change when content is changed, not when content is viewed. Perhaps a way to have the copyright reflect the last modification date of the file or some such process…

Or I could just be making all this up.

But heck, with copyrights in the USA now lasting 72 billion years (or 144 billion years if you are Disney) – what is the real reason to make sure that your copyright stays up to date? In fact, your "Copyright 1993" web pages simply add authenticity and a "retro" feel – while the copyright is still legally enforceable. Heck, nothing makes you more "l33t" than having a web page you published back when the web was ALLCAPS and blink tags, you know, back when Yahoo was still useful.

]]>