Re: [groff] 02/02: src/roff/troff/input.cpp: Update comments.

[G. Branden Robinson]

Hi Werner!

At 2020-03-31T17:41:47+0200, Werner LEMBERG wrote:
> This is not the point of view taken by the FSF.  To cite from
> 
>   https://www.gnu.org/prep/maintain/maintain.html#Copyright-Notices
> 
> (emphasis added by me).
> 
>     To update the list of year numbers, add each year in which you
>     have made nontrivial changes to the package.  (Here we assume
>                                         ^^^^^^^

I know.  That's why I'm only griping in a commit message rather than
hoisting the flag of revolution.  :)

"The work" (the package) is a useful boundary for copyright purposes.

On the other hand, good software design principles militate in the
direction of modularity, which produces a sort of tension.  If
copyrights were things that actually expired in our lifetimes (for works
we were alive to witness), it might be easier to see how an expansive
interpretation of "work" could be used to unjustifiably assert copyright
persistence in portions of works that should have fallen into the public
domain.

Regards,
Branden

signature.asc
Description: PGP signature