On Wed, 13 May 1998, Rolf Braun wrote:
> IMHO, that's really a nit to pick given that the diffs will be used to
> patch source files that DO have the copyright notice. I think the reason
> nobody's sued FreeBSD over this is that nobody at Berkeley is insane enough
> to pick nits like this.

Yeah, perhaps so, but Berkeley isn't the only user of that style of
license... I believe some people _have_ objected to diffs of their code
being distributed without the copyright/license. ftp.netbsd.org was
distributing diffs via email using CTM (I think) for a while, but that
service was shut down due to objections from a developer (I think... I
didn't pay too much attention to the details)

> I guess this could be worked around while still using diffs if every line
> in the copyright header were given a timestamp or build number each time
> the file was modified. Then diff would have to include the header each
> time. Hmm.

Yeah, I think something similar was discussed that'd cause the complete
license text to be included in each diff, but I forget whatever became of
it...

> >Disclaimer: IANAL.
> 
> Hmm? What's that one stand for? :)

I am not a lawyer :)
-- 
Name: Dave Huang     |   Mammal, mammal / their names are called /
INet: khym@bga.com   |   they raise a paw / the bat, the cat /
FurryMUCK: Dahan     |   dolphin and dog / koala bear and hog -- TMBG
Dahan: Hani G Y+C 22 Y++ L+++ W- C++ T++ A+ E+ S++ V++ F- Q+++ P+ B+ PA+ PL++