Are there any specific etiquettes or reasons to organize the following details to a footer in some order?

[Developer] [Years] (C)

Currently my data is organized as:

[Years] [a href="dev's site" title="Goto devs site"][Developer][/a] (C)

  • The © sign on the right is very unusual. Commented Mar 11, 2014 at 18:08
  • You can use © in HTML to create a copyright sign. Commented Mar 11, 2014 at 20:05
  • @CodesInChaos: Any examples? Commented Mar 12, 2014 at 7:17
  • @AndrewGray: Yes I'm using it. Commented Mar 12, 2014 at 7:17

2 Answers 2


The typical form is:

Copyright (c) <years> <copyright holder>.

It's typically followed by a statement describing the claims (e.g. "All rights reserved.")

Common variations:

  • The word "Copyright" is often left out in less formal contexts
  • Sometimes (but rarely) the year(s) are left out
  • (c) vs ©
  • Sometimes there is a comma after the years, sometimes there is a period in the end.

I have never seen the (c) sign at the end and the years generally are listed before the owner. Your example looks very odd to me.


Stackexchange footer:

site design / logo © 2014 stack exchange inc; user contributions licensed under cc by-sa 3.0 with attribution required

BSD licenses:

Copyright (c) <year> <copyright holder>.

Copyright (c) <year>, <copyright holder>


Copyright © 2007 Free Software Foundation, Inc.

Windows Notepad about box:

Copyright © 2009 Microsoft Corporation.


Could you be more clear about the information you have to order? And in what context will it be placed? What is above the footer? Why is the developers name in the footer? Is years the developer's age, work experience or time since subscribing?

You could treat it like any other source citing.
Wikipedia uses the following format:

Ritter, Ron. The Oxford Style Manual. Oxford University Press, 2002, p. 1

[Lastname][Firstname][Title of work][Location(magazine or website)][Year of publish][Edition]

Other formatting normally goes by order of importance. If your years attribute is of most importance, put it first. Put dev's website before dev's name if the website is not a personal website. If it is a personal website the dev's name is of more importance.

From your comment I understand the content will show a website, the footer will hold information about the website like launch date (year) and maker (developer name) which is a link to the dev's personal website.
Normally I would suggest to place any 'go to action links' at the end of the citing. Visitors won't read the rest of the text if they're redirected halfway through the sentence. But in this case the link is the dev's name. It's not a clear go to action and there is a bigger chance people will read the rest of the sentence.
I would place the year first if it has a bigger meaning within the website. Perhaps you have a big list of websites that are ordered by date of last update or whatever. So if it has more meaning than just a nice piece of info to know you can place it first.
But since it's just two pieces of data, I don't think it will really matter in what order you place them.

  • It's basic web site's developer/masthead info. Above the footer depends on the context: content is above it but the type of content varies. It's currently implemented as a sticky footer. The developer's name is commonly placed on websites. Years: when the website is launched and further developed. I think websites have generally a different style than using basic source citing, i.e. other de facto ways to show this information. Commented Mar 12, 2014 at 7:20
  • @thevangelist I've added some more to my original answer Commented Mar 12, 2014 at 8:18

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.