[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Unibyte characters, strings, and buffers

From: David Kastrup
Subject: Re: Unibyte characters, strings, and buffers
Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2014 12:59:20 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.4.50 (gnu/linux)

Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> writes:

> My goal is not to convince you to do something you don't want to.
> The main issue here, at least for me, is not whether Mr. X wants to
> describe an existing implementation -- we obviously cannot do anything
> if he doesn't, no matter what are his reasons.  The main issue here
> is, once Mr. X _did_ describe such an implementation, is it OK for
> someone else, who is not familiar with the actual code, to
> re-implement it from scratch, and then submit it to Emacs as their
> own, under assigned copyright.  My conclusion from everything I know
> and read is that YES, it is OK.
> IOW, I'd like to avoid the situation where others here might become
> intimidated by what you wrote in a broader sense, and will as result
> refrain from participating in discussions that reveal details of other
> implementations, or from assigning their code written based on those
> discussions.  That would cause some real damage to Emacs.

Nobody claimed that the broken copyright system does not lead to a whole
lot of real damage to a whole lot of software development.

may be somewhat instructional about some current court practice in the
U.S.A.  Please note that Oracle/Google ruling is unfortunately somewhat
atypical and on appeal (appeal hearing was in December)
and that the FSF would not have been in a position to pay the kind of
legal expenses incurred here.

David Kastrup

reply via email to

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