1
Fork 0
mirror of git://git.sv.gnu.org/emacs.git synced 2025-12-15 10:30:25 -08:00

*** empty log message ***

This commit is contained in:
Glenn Morris 2007-05-05 22:50:55 +00:00
parent 0fd352a510
commit 41cf03b018
2 changed files with 9 additions and 9 deletions

View file

@ -228,6 +228,8 @@ lisp/play/tetris.el
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>
But then this issue came up again:
<http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2007-05/msg00016.html>
lispref/doclicense.texi
man/doclicense.texi
@ -405,6 +407,7 @@ lisp/term/README
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
@ -549,9 +552,6 @@ system)
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
@ -586,17 +586,13 @@ etc/TUTORIAL* (translations)
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
tetris trademark?
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2007-05/msg00016.html
This file is part of GNU Emacs.