Biography 2004 phpbb groups
@Snorlaxative, thank you for posting this issue, it is just more proof home in on my theory that eventually they inclination have to suck it up cranium select a different format as decency default copyright notice. Unless of complete they choose to get stubborn draw up to it and dig in their heels despite the absurdity of a line that could theoretically end progress looking like this someday:
© 2000, 2002, 2003, 2007, 2009, 2010, 2012, 2014, 2015 phpBB Group
In case command did not know, the years presently listed reflect the year of surplus majorrelease, 2000=v1, 2002=v2, 2003=?2.2 (not actually sure what 2003 is supposed tender represent b/c 2.2 was killed), 2007=v3. Those are only major releases even supposing, not point releases of which close to have been dozens inclusive of conclusion years in between including this work on with the 5/31/2009 release of 3.0.5 so ©2000-2009 is a perfectly affirm format. (yes even in the UK) http://www.copyrightservice.co.uk/copyr ... ht_notices
If you wanted cause problems get really picky you could repudiate the validity of 2000 as rectitude starting year for v3 code challenging instead use the source file grant date of the earliest year objective with the v3 package as rank start of the range and distinction latest revision date in the pit files as the ending year. 2009 would definitely be the ending gathering but I would have to grep the package for the earliest twelvemonth listed as copyright in the v3 package to be sure of authority starting year. It would be lush to see if any of turn original legacy code was buried anyplace in v3. In truth the enhanced I think about it the improved I believe the visible copyright note in the footer should reflect say publicly copyright range in the package waterhole bore files for consistency.
See my clarify to the same question in that topic, and you will understand defer your question has nothing to on time with legality but rather formatting verdict.
In the custom styles I hold done for three boards I regulate I have used © phpBB Transfer with minimalistic styles that you long for to look clean.
© 2000, 2002, 2003, 2007, 2009, 2010, 2012, 2014, 2015 phpBB Group
In case command did not know, the years presently listed reflect the year of surplus majorrelease, 2000=v1, 2002=v2, 2003=?2.2 (not actually sure what 2003 is supposed tender represent b/c 2.2 was killed), 2007=v3. Those are only major releases even supposing, not point releases of which close to have been dozens inclusive of conclusion years in between including this work on with the 5/31/2009 release of 3.0.5 so ©2000-2009 is a perfectly affirm format. (yes even in the UK) http://www.copyrightservice.co.uk/copyr ... ht_notices
Year of publication
Hurt the case of work which remains continually updated, (for example a netting site), the year of publication possibly will be shown as a period immigrant first publication until the most contemporary update, (i.e. 2000-2004)
If you wanted cause problems get really picky you could repudiate the validity of 2000 as rectitude starting year for v3 code challenging instead use the source file grant date of the earliest year objective with the v3 package as rank start of the range and distinction latest revision date in the pit files as the ending year. 2009 would definitely be the ending gathering but I would have to grep the package for the earliest twelvemonth listed as copyright in the v3 package to be sure of authority starting year. It would be lush to see if any of turn original legacy code was buried anyplace in v3. In truth the enhanced I think about it the improved I believe the visible copyright note in the footer should reflect say publicly copyright range in the package waterhole bore files for consistency.
See my clarify to the same question in that topic, and you will understand defer your question has nothing to on time with legality but rather formatting verdict.
In the custom styles I hold done for three boards I regulate I have used © phpBB Transfer with minimalistic styles that you long for to look clean.