Files missing copyright notices

[sprstnd]

The individual files are missing copyright notices about licensing. Each file should be begin with a copyright notice and an optional reference to the license file.

[cat2neat]

@sprstnd Thank you for pointing that out.
Whether I(we) should put copyright notice(or reference to the LICENSE) on each file or only put a separeted one always bother me.
Every time when I published something, I googled and tend to come to the conclusion
just put a single LICENCE per repo (actually two in this case as including derivative work from https://github.com/golang/go).
Would you like to tell me If you'd know the exact source that force me to put a copyright notice and optional reference on each file?
I'll put on each if the source convince me.
thanks.

[sprstnd]

wikipedia should have enough on copyright law. check it out. right now its arguable that some code within this repo(those files without copyright notices) are subject to public domain. The license is nullified by the fact that none of the files have a copyright, so there is no ownership, and if there is no ownership of the works then who is to enforce the license.

[cat2neat]

I always couldn't find any enforcement on wikipedia or even on law itself.
Could you give me specific pointers?

its arguable that some code within this repo(those files without copyright notices) are subject to public domain

From what I understand, it's not.
but I know there is a possibility that someone may misinterpret when they only take care individual files without knowing that the LICENCE exists on the project top.

While I'm not taking care such cases,
Having licence headers in each file might be helpful for kinda big projects as filed on the below links(unfortunately they failed to convince).

junit-team/junit4#1132
https://github.com/kennethreitz/requests/issues/1610

As it's not my intention to bother people who try to use code published due to the lack of copyright header,
I'd take another look for such cases.

Sharing any other cases that may prevent from using code without headless would be appreciated.

[sprstnd]

This is basic stuff. The files need a copyright to declare ownership, the owner/s extend right to others within the license file. The owner/s could release the works under multiple licenses( gpl,bsd) and that is perfectly acceptable, but they must have ownership of that work in order to enforce the license.

I will now go beyond arguable, and claim that is it perfectly for someone to make use of the uncopyrighted portions of this repo with no regard what so ever as to the language within the license file. Those works without copyright notices are within public domain.

However, I am not sure to the extent of your "borrowing" from the go project and other projects. This could lead to some messy legal disagreements, as copyright notices may have been removed from code. It is in my honest opinion that you should research copyright law with regards to software.

sorry to be such a party pooper.

[cat2neat]

This is basic stuff. The files need a copyright to declare ownership, the owner/s extend right to others within the license file. The owner/s could release the works under multiple licenses( gpl,bsd) and that is perfectly acceptable, but they must have ownership of that work in order to enforce the license.

Well, could you give me any explicit, reliable pointer that enforce us to have copyright header on each file for whom don't want to make the code public domain?

Apparently there have been two insists(interprets) in the world that

• Not only a single LICENCE per repo but a header on each as what you have suggested
• A single LICENCE per repo is sufficient

and actually they both exist and it seems working to me.

I will now go beyond arguable, and claim that is it perfectly for someone to make use of the uncopyrighted portions of this repo with no regard what so ever as to the language within the license file. Those works without copyright notices are within public domain.

From what I understand,
The likelihood misusing may increase without copyright header compared to with header.
so as I said at the prev comment, give me pointer.

However, I am not sure to the extent of your "borrowing" from the go project and other projects. This could lead to some messy legal disagreements, as copyright notices may have been removed from code. It is in my honest opinion that you should research copyright law with regards to software.

Thank you for the suggestion. I will.

sorry to be such a party pooper.

You're well come.
I simply want to know what is the truth.

Anyway,
I'm considering putting copyright header regardless of the truth since I just want to write code and publish and hope to be used for anyone who want without any annoyance.

[sprstnd]

nothing is forcing you to put a copyright header in your files. putting a copyright header in the files helps protect your rights as the author of the code, and adding the optional license reference helps those wanting to use your code understand the permission granted by the author to users. Under law you are the rightful owner of any works you produce even if they don't carry a copyright notice.

if someone was to borrow part your works for their needs(and then someone else borrow that code from the person who borrowed it from you), those individual files have no identifying information as to whom the author is and what permissions were given by the author. Adding a copyright header and optional license reference helps those that want to use your code understand who owns what and what permissions were given.

My advice to you to help better protect your interests and the user of your works is to add a copyright header with a reference to the license file the grants them certain permissions.

// Copyright <> <>. All rights reserved.
//<>

[cat2neat]

@sprstnd Thank you for clarifying.
I believe what I've understood is same with what you've suggested.

One thing I don't much care about the below

if someone was to borrow part your works for their needs(and then someone else borrow that code from the person who borrowed it from you), those individual files have no identifying information as to whom the author is and what permissions were given by the author. Adding a copyright header and optional license reference helps those that want to use your code understand who owns what and what permissions were given.

for code I've written(I don't mind even if someone misinterpreted the licence)
However in this(gtcp) case
Since I've borrowed part of code from go/golang
I have to take that part into consideration to encourage others to understand (at least) the go licence as much as possible. So I'd like to add a copyright header for each file.

Thank you.

[sprstnd]

Its kind of like when animals piss on their leftovers in the wild. They don't necessarily like the taste of piss but it lets other know who owns those leftovers.

Using such precautions helps ensure those using your works know the freedoms bestowed upon them.