Removed footer copyright year

[lunny]

As the title.

[appleboy]

LGTM

[plessbd]

DON'T CHANGE THE COPYRIGHT YEAR
There is really no reason to put the year on there anyway, it just adds more work if you want to update it. You just need to have a notice, having this on git establishes copyright without having to post it everywhere

The copyright notice on a work establishes a claim to copyright. The date on the notice establishes how far back the claim is made. This means if you update the date, you are no longer claiming the copyright for the original date and that means if somebody has copied the work in the meantime and they claim its theirs on the ground that their publishing the copy was before your claim, then it will be difficult to establish who is the originator of the work.

Therefore, if the claim is based on common law copyright (not formally registered), then the date should be the date of first publication. If the claim is a registered copyright, then the date should be the date claimed in the registration. In cases where the work was substantially revised you may establish a new copyright claim to the revised work by adding another copyright notice with a newer date or by adding an additional date to the existing notice as in "© 2000, 2010". Again, the added date establishes how far back the claim is made on the revision.

If you want more information: https://www.reddit.com/r/webdev/comments/1p9tao/auto_updating_the_year_on_copyright_notices/

There is a lot of information there and: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2390230/do-copyright-dates-need-to-be-updated

Sorry if this is not wanted, but this has always been one of my pet peeves wherever I work with this all over the files and people making changes to the copyright when it is not needed, especially with git giving you the date and people not understanding that it is based on the publish date.

[lunny]

@plessbd, I have updated, please review again.

[plessbd]

Better but usually I just don't put a date at all

[lunny]

See this page bottom, github also put a date here.

[plessbd]

So here is where things get interesting...

What does the copyright notice pertain to?

Since it is being added to every page and content from users is on the page, the copyright is actually deceiving. Unless gitea / github have something that says all the code uploaded is actually being given over to them.

Look at all the google pages, notice they dont have any copyright dates? (at least I couldn't find it)
Look at the difference on http://askubuntu.com/ they specifically call out what they are copyrighting

Another good read about this and more:
http://hackerboss.com/get-rid-of-templates/
http://drbacchus.com/copyright-statements-in-source-files/

[lunny]

So should we remove the copyright year? @tboerger @bkcsoft

[bkcsoft]

IMO the copyright is bloat. But it depends on what license the theme is released under (not MIT since we're talking design, not code)

[tboerger]

Ok for me
LGTM