Tune and unify copyright statement(s) across components

[yarikoptic]

brought up in dandi/dandiarchive-legacy#698

Years: use full range for relevant component development, not just last year.

Copyright "owner": DANDI is too vague. Quite comment accepted (not sure how much legally tested though) practice is to use {project} Team. Used IIRC by numpy, jupyter and many others (datalad ;-) ). So I would vote for "DANDI Team"

[waxlamp]

I see that NumPy and Jupyter both attribute the copyright to a business/nonprofit entity, and while Datalad does indeed assign copyright to a "team", this page has fine grained details over which individuals own the copyright on various files in the site: https://www.datalad.org/copyright.html (the third guy under the * entry sounds familiar...).

Is it easier/more accurate to just assign the copyright to MIT? Or do we want to follow a similar approach as DataLad?

(I am in danger of overthinking this. In the end, I think we should pick an attribution and just move on. DANDI Team is ok with me, even if untested in court.)

[yarikoptic]

I see that NumPy and Jupyter both attribute the copyright to a business/nonprofit entity,

hm...

(git)lena:~/proj/numpy[master]git
$> head LICENSE.txt   
Copyright (c) 2005-2021, NumPy Developers.

But I guess they might attribute to NumFocus -- is that the one?

this page has fine grained details over which individuals own the copyright on various files in the site: https://www.datalad.org/copyright.html (the third guy under the * entry sounds familiar...).

that is only for the website. Ideally borrowed copyrighted stuff should indeed be listed separately with copyright/licenses. So to be kosher IMHO website might follow DataLad's website and have
"content licensed ??? — 2018–2021 DANDI Team — unless indicated otherwise" with pointer to the page with details, like done for datalad website.

For software -- COPYING or LICENSE file should carry the similar details, see e.g. https://github.com/datalad/datalad/blob/master/COPYING

[yarikoptic]

We should add this to some face-to-face discussion event.