emacs-diffs
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Emacs-diffs] Changes to emacs/admin/notes/copyright, v [EMACS_22_BASE]


From: Glenn Morris
Subject: [Emacs-diffs] Changes to emacs/admin/notes/copyright, v [EMACS_22_BASE]
Date: Sun, 13 May 2007 19:46:27 +0000

CVSROOT:        /sources/emacs
Module name:    emacs
Branch:         EMACS_22_BASE
Changes by:     Glenn Morris <gm>       07/05/13 19:46:27

Index: copyright
===================================================================
RCS file: /sources/emacs/emacs/admin/notes/copyright,v
retrieving revision 1.79.2.1
retrieving revision 1.79.2.2
diff -u -b -r1.79.2.1 -r1.79.2.2
--- copyright   28 Apr 2007 19:23:08 -0000      1.79.2.1
+++ copyright   13 May 2007 19:46:26 -0000      1.79.2.2
@@ -228,6 +228,7 @@
   the concept.
   rms: "My understanding is that game rules as such are not copyrightable."
   <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2007-01/msg00960.html>
+  rms: Legal advice is that we are ok and need not worry about this.
 
 lispref/doclicense.texi
 man/doclicense.texi
@@ -405,6 +406,7 @@
   Accordingly, FSF copyright was added.
 
 src/unexhp9k800.c  (and dependent src/m/sr2k.h)
+  http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2007-02/msg00138.html
   - briefly removed due to legal uncertainly Jan-Mar 2007. The
   relevant assignment is under "hp9k800" in copyright.list. File was
   written by John V. Morris at HP, and disclaimed by the author and
@@ -425,6 +427,14 @@
 http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2007-04/msg01427.html
 
 
+lisp/progmodes/python.el
+Dave Love alerted us to a potential legal problem:
+http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-pretest-bug/2007-04/msg00459.html
+
+On consultation with a lawyer, we found there was no problem:
+http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2007-05/msg00466.html
+
+
 ** Issues that are "fixed" for the release of Emacs 22, but we may
    wish to revisit later in more detail
 
@@ -549,9 +559,6 @@
     Emacs 22 is released (though if they can be fixed before, that is
     obviously good):
 
-Maybe some relevant comments here?
-<http://groups.google.com/group/linux.debian.legal/browse_thread/thread/123547ea95437a1f>
-
 
 Is it OK to just `cvs remove' a file for legal reasons, or is
 something more drastic needed? A removed file is still available from
@@ -586,16 +593,9 @@
 Done: TUTORIAL.eo
 
 
-REMOVED src/unexhp9k800.c
-  - we would like to re-add this file if possible. Please let us know
-  if you can clarify its legal status.
-  http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2007-02/msg00138.html
-
-
 *** These are copyright issues still to be addressed:
 
-python.el potential legal problem
-http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-pretest-bug/2007-04/msg00459.html
+None known.
 
 
 




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]