Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site mit-eddie.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!rms@mit-prep
From: rms@mit-prep
Newsgroups: net.emacs
Subject: GNU Emacs
Message-ID: <4559@mit-eddie.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 27-Jun-85 07:58:34 EDT
Article-I.D.: mit-eddi.4559
Posted: Thu Jun 27 07:58:34 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 28-Jun-85 02:05:41 EDT
Sender: dae...@mit-eddi.UUCP
Organization: MIT, Cambridge, MA
Lines: 36
From: Richard M. Stallman < rms@mit-prep>
I was going to wait for Fen's message before saying more on the issue,
but Fen's message ran into mailer troubles at Megatest. It may be
on its way now, but I don't want to wait any longer.
I have decided to replace the Gosling code in GNU Emacs,
even though I still believe Fen and I have permission to
distribute that code, in order to keep people's confidence
in the GNU project.
I came to this decision when I found, this night, that I saw
how to rewrite the parts that had seemed hard. I expect to
have the job done by the weekend.
Unfortunately, this will delay the the time you receive the GNU Emacs
manual. I'm sure Unipress is happy to have accomplished that.
Software sharers are happy if you get good software.
Software-hoarding organizations such as Unipress and CCA are looking
for ways they can restrict you, because each restriction they can
manage to impose means more pressure on you to pay them. If there
is an alternative to paying them, they want to close it off.
For example, just by looking at Zimmerman's messages, you can see
that his goal is to convince you of the most restrictive interpretation
of the law at every juncture--to get you to forfeit as much as possible.
Gosling says he supports free software--yet he was clearly making
preparations to sell Gosling Emacs even while urging the community
to contribute.
This is the kind of attitude that people develop when they make a
habit of profiting from interfering with other people.
In the long run, you are better off encouraging the growth of organizations
that want to give you software, and not feeding companies Unipress or CCA
that really just want to take as much as possible from you.
Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site masscomp.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!masscomp!z
From: z...@masscomp.UUCP (Steve Zimmerman)
Newsgroups: net.emacs
Subject: Re: GNU Emacs
Message-ID: <733@masscomp.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 28-Jun-85 09:05:21 EDT
Article-I.D.: masscomp.733
Posted: Fri Jun 28 09:05:21 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 29-Jun-85 01:26:09 EDT
References: <4559@mit-eddie.UUCP>
Organization: Masscomp - Westford, MA
Lines: 25
> From: Richard M. Stallman
> For example, just by looking at Zimmerman's messages, you can see
> that his goal is to convince you of the most restrictive interpretation
> of the law at every juncture--to get you to forfeit as much as possible.
I challenge you to find an attorney who has a "less restrictive"
interpretation of the law in this case. This just happens to be the way
the law is interpreted by the courts.
> This is the kind of attitude that people develop when they make a
> habit of profiting from interfering with other people.
In an earlier message, I urged you to rewrite those portions of GNU
Emacs containing Gosling's code. Now that you are doing so, I am quite
satisfied, and once this is finished, I can see no legal reason for
someone not to use GNU Emacs. I fail to see how I have profited from
this. To the contrary, it seems to be your users who have profited, for
they will soon be able to use GNU Emacs without doubts as to its legal
status. Since UniPress apparently helped you come to your decision, I
cannot see why they should be condemned. I think most of your users
would prefer to wait a little bit longer for the GNU Emacs manual in
order to have a product that is free from questions about its legality.
Steve Zimmerman
Masscomp