Here's a full explanation of how to protect your web site:
http://www.benedict.com/Digital/Web/WebProtect.aspx
Section 3 ("Notice") answers your question directly:
"include the copyright symbol and/or the term "Copyright", the year of copyright, and the name of the copyright holder"
That's the proper order and there's no need to use the term "All Rights Reserved."
2006-07-08 10:56:28
·
answer #1
·
answered by Another 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
Here's what the US Copyright Office has to say:
"The notice for visually perceptible copies should contain all the following three elements:
1. The symbol © (the letter C in a circle), or the word “Copyright,” or the abbreviation “Copr.”; and
2. The year of first publication of the work. In the case of compilations or derivative works incorporating previously published material, the year date of first publication of the compilation or derivative work is sufficient. The year date may be omitted where a pictorial, graphic, or sculptural work, with accompanying textual matter, if any, is reproduced in or on greeting cards, postcards, stationery, jewelry, dolls, toys, or any useful article; and
3. The name of the owner of copyright in the work, or an abbreviation by which the name can be recognized, or a generally known alternative designation of the owner.
Example: © 2006 John Doe
The 'C in a circle” notice is used only on “visually perceptible copies.'"
Hope that helps!
2006-07-11 06:24:44
·
answer #2
·
answered by TM Express™ 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
This Site Might Help You.
RE:
What is the correct format for the copyright/rights reserved line at the bottom of a web page?
I would like to know the correct order to place "Copyright", "[copyright symbol]", "All Rights Reserved", "[date]", etc. at the bottom of a web page
2015-08-24 06:11:21
·
answer #3
·
answered by ? 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
He will not sue nor will he directly call the author a liar. He is in the same "swift-boat" as John Kerry was. We notice he never sued anyone either. Why? Because then one has to testify under oath and the author gets to prove what he is saying is true. Interestingly, back in the Bill Clinton era there was a similar situation. Juanita Broderick made the very public claim that Bill Clinton raped her back in the 1970's. Sure enough, Bill Clinton never actually came out and denied it nor did he sue her. What he did was have his lawyer come out, and announce to the press that in 1974 the President did not rape Juanita Broderick. He then refused to answer any follow up questions and went back inside the White House. You see, back in 1974, Bill Clinton was the Attorney General of Arkansas not the President of the United States. So, in reality, Bill Clinton's lawyer was stating that Jimmy Carter did not rape Juanita Broderick. They did not call him "Slick Willie" for nothing! *
2016-03-19 07:53:06
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
For the best answers, search on this site https://shorturl.im/awBUo
Typical left spin. Lawsuits take years, yadda yadda yadda. The author nailed Obama cold. And the left wing cryers can sob duck tears. Obama won't dance with this because its the truth. He knows it. And the American people are finding out, and now they will know it. Slightly dark. Nice try slick. But Your blow-in smoke to the choir. Been there done that. So Explain your stuff to the bots. Your boy Obama is a fraud, Pure plain and simple.
2016-04-06 23:57:57
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
See that information on this page below. It is accurate. Duplicate that.
2006-07-08 10:48:22
·
answer #6
·
answered by gemami 2
·
0⤊
0⤋