fhp@unipress.uucp (fred pack) (06/26/85)
This is a general announcement to the community from UniPress Software, Inc. UniPress is aware of the "GNU Emacs" program being offered as a public domain work which has been widely transmitted and distributed. We have no objection whatsoever to a public domain program which functionally resembles our Gosling UniPress Emacs program. However, we have examined the GNU Emacs program and have found that it contains certain material which is copyright protected by James Gosling, from his Emacs program. Mr. Gosling has provided the distribution rights to UniPress and to no one else. Years ago, he did supply copies of his program to various institutions, but these copies were covered by a "no further distribution" clause. Accordingly, UniPress wants to inform the community that portions of the GNU Emacs program are most definitely not public domain, and that use and/or distribution of the GNU Emacs program is not necessarily proper.
sasaki@harvard.ARPA (Marty Sasaki) (06/27/85)
>This is a general announcement to the community from UniPress Software, >Inc. ... >Accordingly, UniPress wants to inform the community that portions of the >GNU Emacs program are most definitely not public domain, and that use >and/or distribution of the GNU Emacs program is not necessarily proper. What exactly does this mean? Does this mean that UniPress would like to discourage use, but is planning no legal action? Does this mean that UniPress is going to sue everyone who distributes and/or uses GNU Emacs? -- ---------------- Marty Sasaki net: sasaki@harvard.{arpa,uucp} Havard University Science Center phone: 617-495-1270 One Oxford Street Cambridge, MA 02138
rusty@sdcarl.UUCP (rusty c. wright) (06/28/85)
In article <216@harvard.ARPA> sasaki@harvard.UUCP (Marty sasaki) writes: >>This is a general announcement to the community from UniPress Software, >>Inc. >... >>Accordingly, UniPress wants to inform the community that portions of the >>GNU Emacs program are most definitely not public domain, and that use >>and/or distribution of the GNU Emacs program is not necessarily proper. > >What exactly does this mean? Does this mean that UniPress would like to >discourage use, but is planning no legal action? Does this mean that >UniPress is going to sue everyone who distributes and/or uses GNU Emacs? No, it means that I'm going to sue everyone that keeps posting this crap to net.emacs. Would you twits fight this out amongst yourselves and quit wasting my time (and disk space) with your bickering? -- rusty c. wright {ucbvax,ihnp4,akgua,hplabs,sdcsvax}!sdcarl!rusty
rs@mirror.UUCP (06/28/85)
I thought UniPress's note very clear. "We believe that what
is being done is wrong." They don't wish to commit themselves
to any course of action, so no such course (i.e., "go ahead" or
"get ready to be sued") was given. Given how clouded the situation
seems to be, they said The Right Thing.
--
Rich $alz {mit-eddie, ihnp4!inmet, wjh12, cca, datacube} !mirror!rs
Mirror Systems 2067 Massachusetts Ave.
617-661-0777 Cambridge, MA, 02140phil@amdcad.UUCP (Phil Ngai) (06/29/85)
In article <215@sdcarl.UUCP> rusty@sdcarl.UUCP (Rusty Wright) writes: >No, it means that I'm going to sue everyone that keeps posting this >crap to net.emacs. Would you twits fight this out amongst yourselves >and quit wasting my time (and disk space) with your bickering? Speak for yourself. I find this discussion of great interest. -- Phil Ngai +1 408 749 5720 UUCP: {ucbvax,decwrl,ihnp4,allegra}!amdcad!phil ARPA: amdcad!phil@decwrl.ARPA
root@bu-cs.UUCP (Barry Shein) (07/01/85)
Just a thought: I think we all agree that Richard Stallman is to be credited with the design and delivery of the original EMACS in it's modern form (I know a lot of people at MIT had their hand in it but as far as I understand RMS nailed it down and made it useful to the rest of the world.) Now, assuming there is some basis for that, it is kinda sad to hear that *he* is the one under attack over a re-write of his code (from a functional level.) Exactly what do all these people who are making $$ off of selling the editor he popularized owe RMS??? Isn't he the one being ripped off really? Is there *any* value to his claim as an 'inventor'? I know, stuffy arguments about legalese. It would perhaps be nice if law were an algorithm and you just apply it to the facts as most of the arguments on the net seem to assume. The world ain't really that simple! Compelling moral arguments are *exactly* what overturn laws or cause special or new interpretations (otherwise you would have to assume the law is a closed, self-sustaining system with no need for outside influence, which is certainly not true.) Certainly the fact that RMS was so free with his distribution of the original EMACS should not ultimately be his downfall, I doubt a court would go along with that, I suspect a good lawyer could make mince out of other people's claims against him, I think they know it and would be terrified to have to face RMS in court with that hanging over their heads (your honor, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I introduce the inventor of EMACS....) I'm not saying Unipress or CCA have no rights in the case, I paid CCA for their EMACS and certainly have gotten my money's worth. I'm just saying that this is an incredibly special case, if it were anyone else but RMS... I for one would like to say one thing that I have yet to hear from any of these parties: Thank you Richard. -Barry Shein, Boston University
jans@mako.UUCP (Jan Steinman) (07/04/85)
In article <450@bu-cs.UUCP> root@bu-cs.UUCP (Barry Shein) writes: >...[a well thought-out, non-inflamatory ethical argument based on the origin > of the original EMACS]... > >I for one would like to say one thing that I have yet to hear from >any of these parties: > >Thank you Richard. Amen! Imagine the worst-case scenario: some judge issues a restraining order against use of all EMACSes while studying the case, and we all have to go back to using vi! Whatever the outcome, whoever gets rich, whoever gets to feel good about themselves for whatever reason, thanks for unloosing EMACS on the world, Richard. -- :::::: Jan Steinman Box 1000, MS 61-161 (w)503/685-2843 :::::: :::::: tektronix!tekecs!jans Wilsonville, OR 97070 (h)503/657-7703 ::::::