fix copyrights in all features ------------------------------ Key: JBDS-1636 URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JBDS-1636 Project: Developer Studio (JBoss Developer Studio) Issue Type: Bug Components: Build, documentation, Requirements Affects Versions: 4.1.0.M1, 5.0.0.M1 Reporter: Nick Boldt Assignee: Nick Boldt Fix For: 4.1.0.CR1, 5.0.0.M1 From Richard Fontana: > If you are under general instructions to use "JBoss by Red Hat" for marketing or branding purposes that's fine. > The one place where it is not formally correct is in copyright statements themselves. Those should at least say "Copyright <year> Red Hat, Inc." (or, as I often recommend for JBoss source code files, "Copyright <year> Red Hat, Inc. and/or its affiliates". > The 'provider name' by contrast doesn't matter from a legal perspective. It doesn't matter to me if there's some inconsistency between provider name and copyright holder name.

fix copyrights in all features ------------------------------ Key: JBDS-1636 URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JBDS-1636 Project: Developer Studio (JBoss Developer Studio) Issue Type: Bug Components: Build, documentation, Requirements Affects Versions: 4.1.0.M1, 5.0.0.M2 Reporter: Nick Boldt Assignee: Nick Boldt Fix For: 4.1.0.CR1, 5.0.0.M2 From Richard Fontana: > If you are under general instructions to use "JBoss by Red Hat" for marketing or branding purposes that's fine. > The one place where it is not formally correct is in copyright statements themselves. Those should at least say "Copyright <year> Red Hat, Inc." (or, as I often recommend for JBoss source code files, "Copyright <year> Red Hat, Inc. and/or its affiliates". > The 'provider name' by contrast doesn't matter from a legal perspective. It doesn't matter to me if there's some inconsistency between provider name and copyright holder name.

fix copyrights in all features ------------------------------ Key: JBDS-1636 URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JBDS-1636 Project: Developer Studio (JBoss Developer Studio) Issue Type: Bug Components: Build, documentation, Requirements Affects Versions: 4.1.0.M1, 5.0.0.M2 Reporter: Nick Boldt Assignee: Nick Boldt Fix For: 4.1.0.CR2, 5.0.0.M2 From Richard Fontana: > If you are under general instructions to use "JBoss by Red Hat" for marketing or branding purposes that's fine. > The one place where it is not formally correct is in copyright statements themselves. Those should at least say "Copyright <year> Red Hat, Inc." (or, as I often recommend for JBoss source code files, "Copyright <year> Red Hat, Inc. and/or its affiliates". > The 'provider name' by contrast doesn't matter from a legal perspective. It doesn't matter to me if there's some inconsistency between provider name and copyright holder name.

fix copyrights in all features ------------------------------ Key: JBDS-1636 URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JBDS-1636 Project: Developer Studio (JBoss Developer Studio) Issue Type: Bug Components: Build, documentation, Requirements Affects Versions: 4.1.0.M1, 5.0.0.M2 Reporter: Nick Boldt Assignee: Nick Boldt Fix For: 4.1.0.CR2, 5.0.0.M2 From Richard Fontana: > If you are under general instructions to use "JBoss by Red Hat" for marketing or branding purposes that's fine. > The one place where it is not formally correct is in copyright statements themselves. Those should at least say "Copyright <year> Red Hat, Inc." (or, as I often recommend for JBoss source code files, "Copyright <year> Red Hat, Inc. and/or its affiliates". > The 'provider name' by contrast doesn't matter from a legal perspective. It doesn't matter to me if there's some inconsistency between provider name and copyright holder name.

fix copyrights in all features ------------------------------ Key: JBDS-1636 URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JBDS-1636 Project: Developer Studio (JBoss Developer Studio) Issue Type: Bug Components: Build, documentation, Requirements Affects Versions: 4.1.0.M1, 5.0.0.M2 Reporter: Nick Boldt Assignee: Nick Boldt Fix For: 5.0.0.M2, 4.1.0.CR2 From Richard Fontana: > If you are under general instructions to use "JBoss by Red Hat" for marketing or branding purposes that's fine. > The one place where it is not formally correct is in copyright statements themselves. Those should at least say "Copyright <year> Red Hat, Inc." (or, as I often recommend for JBoss source code files, "Copyright <year> Red Hat, Inc. and/or its affiliates". > The 'provider name' by contrast doesn't matter from a legal perspective. It doesn't matter to me if there's some inconsistency between provider name and copyright holder name.