[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: Fri, 20 Oct 2006 22:48:28 +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:
>>> There is an Emacs mode out there for the Finite Element Analysis (FEA)
>>> program Ansys, the file is  called ansys-mode.el and there it's
>>> written:
>>> ;;; Copyright (C) 1997 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
>>> ;; Author: Tim Read <address@hidden>
>>> ;; Author: Geoff Foster <address@hidden>
>>> ;; Maintainer: Tim Read <address@hidden>
>>> So it looks to me that they at least intended to give the copyright
>>> to the FSF.
>> Not necessarily.  They could have copied some original file from which
>> they started.  Whatever they intended, without them giving the FSF a
>> legally binding assignment and the FSF _accepting_ the copyright, this
>> comment is simply wrong.
> They mentioned octave-mode as their basis
> ;; Copyright (C) 1997, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006
> ;; Free Software Foundation, Inc.
> ;; Author: Kurt Hornik <address@hidden>
> ;; Author: John Eaton <address@hidden>
> ;; Maintainer: Kurt Hornik <address@hidden>

So they probably used an old version of octave-mode and did not add a
copyright notice of their own.  But their copyright does not disappear
just because they did not add a notice.

>> But the question is whether it makes a difference to you.  It would
>> if you wanted to contribute the code you develop from there back to
>> the
> When the code will be accepted, I would be proud to contribute.

To what?  octave-mode?  ansys-mode.el as maintained by Tim Read?
Depending on who maintains the stuff, and whether he requires an
assignment, procedures may differ.

> So, yes, it makes a difference to me.
>> FSF, or if you trust the FSF to behave more reasonably about
>> license enforcement than the authors.
> Or it makes a difference when I trust the FSF more about the
> enforcement.  Sorry, I do not understand.

One thing is having the copyright, another is enforcing it.  If you
want it enforced, you might want to see it in the hands of somebody
who cares.  If you don't particularly care about enforcement, this
might not be so important.

>> But other than that, you can hardly be expected to carry out
>> diligent research about what the above listed authors actually did
>> in regard of paperwork or not.
> Well I twice tried to contact them via email, but I'm not so sure
> what you want to tell me with this sentence.  Shall I behave as if
> they did not permit to use the code and rewrite every single line?

For what purpose?  What do you ultimately want to do with the code?

David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

reply via email to

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