Sorry, I guess I breezed over that part of Andrew's email... I also agree that it should be Maemo Community (sans council). I'm assuming that there's someone at Nokia Legal we could iron this up with?<br><br>Tim<br><br><br><blockquote style="border-style: none none none solid; border-color: -moz-use-text-color -moz-use-text-color -moz-use-text-color rgb(34, 67, 127); border-width: 0pt 0pt 0pt 2px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 5px; padding: 0px 0px 0px 5px;"><font face="verdana" size="2">--- Original message follows ---<br><b>Subject: </b>Re: Maemo Site<br><b>From: </b>Dave Neary <dneary@maemo.org><br><b>To: </b>"Andrew Flegg" <andrew@bleb.org><br><b>CC: </b>"Tim" <tim@samoff.com>,"List for community development" <maemo-community@maemo.org>,"Glaubert Oliveira" <glaubert.oliveira@openbossa.org>,"Andre Cunha" <andre.cunha@openbossa.org><br><b>Date: </b>12/07/2008 12:46 pm<br></font><br><br>Hi,<br><br>Andrew Flegg wrote:<br>> One
thing which my early template had, and the HTML should contain is<br>> that the footer should NOT say "Copyright .... Nokia Corporation". I<br>> think the terminology I came up with was:<br>> <br>> "Copyright (c) Maemo Community Council, Nokia Corporation & others<br>> 2005-$YEAR"<br><br>"Copyright... others" is too vague to my mind.<br><br>You might get away with "Copyright Maemo Community and Nokia<br>Corporation" or something similar (brain muddle right now, can't think<br>up something better).<br><br>> The ordering representing that the community (embodied in the Council)<br>> are the primary authors of the site - especially important when<br>> maemo.nokia.com comes along.<br><br>I do have a problem with the Maemo Community Council being designated as<br>a copyright holder too - it's not like there is a corporation. If we're<br>going to say "Maemo council", why not just say "Maemo community"?<br><br>Cheers,<br>Dave.<br><br>-- <br>maemo.org
docsmaster<br>Email: dneary@maemo.org<br>Jabber: bolsh@jabber.org<br><br><br></blockquote>