4 ms·
I rather wonder if things like this are used to encode a proof of intent. If something is marked as copyrighted, it may be trivial to remove the mark, but at l
by barrkel 5y ago
I rather wonder if things like this are used to encode a proof of intent.
If something is marked as copyrighted, it may be trivial to remove the mark, but at least you had to remove the mark, and that's evidence of intent rather than ignorance.
- akx 5y agoOr a piece of software in your toolchain has been unaware of the bit and inadvertently stripped it. Is that evidence of intent still?
- barrkel 5y agoI'm not arguing in favour of it, I'm hypothesizing why it might be added. Your toolchain should set the bit last thing before distribution, I'd expect. If you're talking about a toolchain on the consumption side after distribution, well, consumers shouldn't be modifying content, is what I'd expect the position to be. No derivative works and all that.
- giorgioz 5y agoI was wondering the same with the COPYRIGHT note at the top of all files in a code repo. Clearly someone that have the code can easily remove the COPYRIGHT header but then it will demostrate they had actively red it and decided to remove it. Plus if you add the copyright header in many places it might be forgotten in some.