>> Forgive my possible misconception, but doesn't the 2002, being
>> in the past, mean it's no longer valid?
>
> No. Copyright law varies across the world, so how long a copyright remains
> in
> force varies.
>
> But if the principle you suggest were true, I'd be republishing all Harry
> Potter novels today; the most recent one has a copyright date of 2003.
Ah. Not quite what I meant, but nice suggestion (^.-)
I meant when there's a range like that. For example, WinXP says something
like
(c)1985-2002 (I forget the exact year) And, apparently, people (Mostly
white-hat
hackers) have been releasing dummed-down versions of Windows on the
internet -
all the capabilities, nearly no extra features, so it runs much faster and
costs less/nothing.
> But let's hope that RT will forget copyright and just do what's right.
Who isn't? =^�
> Sunanda
-Izzy Boy
--
To unsubscribe from the list, just send an email to
lists at rebol.com with unsubscribe as the subject.
