[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: beamer, pdflatex and auctex

From: David Kastrup
Subject: Re: beamer, pdflatex and auctex
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 03:27:41 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux)

Dieter Wilhelm <address@hidden> writes:

> David Kastrup <address@hidden> writes:
>> Dieter Wilhelm <address@hidden> writes:
>>> Why is this not sufficient for including their work in the
>>> official Emacs installation, why must they even give up their
>>> copyright?  They already stated that their code can be reused by
>>> everyone, couldn't it?
>> They made no legally binding statement whatsoever.
> From a legal point of view clearly problematic, with common sense
> it's another story.  When I give something to a "charity" I'm not
> eligible to claim later on "interest".

But if there is no proof that you have given anything, that does not

>> Emacs is too important for the FSF to risk that.
> <off_topic>
> I'm curious whether the usage of Emacs and TeX is still growing or has
> reached some saturation / decline in this age of graphical IDEs.
> </off_topic>

My guess is that percentages decrease and absolute numbers increase.

> Furthermore I'm interested whether the guys in the snippet below
> have signed legal papers for the FSF (as is claimed in a certain
> lisp file), I'm using and reworking their code.  Do you know how I
> could get this piece of information in an unbureaucratic way?
> ;; This file containes code from ansys-mod.el.
> ;; Copyright (C) 1997 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
> ;; Author: Tim Read <address@hidden> (Author does not respond)
> ;; Author: Geoff Foster <address@hidden> (Address unreachable,
> ;;   Dieter Wilhelm 2006-03-08)

I don't see an assignment from either person in the copyright
assignment file accessible by GNU maintainers.

Where did you get the claim?

David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

reply via email to

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