We've certainly done total updates in the past. After all, chaning the license constitutes changing the contents ;-)
Also, I was going to apply the same dates to all files. (1999-2004 for collections). This is because there is no accuracy to the start dates on files. The licenses just get copied from the nearest file to hand. The other reason to do it en masse is that it'll get forgotten otherwise. Stephen > > I assume we'd replace -2003 with -2004. So not a problem, then ([^-])2003 > > with \12003-2004 perhaps to add those on. > > And 2001, 2003, etc. The problem is that I am not sure that blast > updating when there is no change to the protected content is correct. I > am not a lawyer, but my understanding is that the last date in the > copyright notice should be the year when the content was last changed. I > am -0 to doing a blast update. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
