Copyrights on various (mostly etc/) files.

Copyrights on various (mostly etc/) files.

[Rob Browning]

It has been suggested to me that some of the files in the Emacs
distribution might not have clear copyrights, and so I wanted to
consult you regarding the issue.

In particular, there was some concern over files like JOKES,
yow.lines, COOKIES, etc.  Have these been GPLed by the relevant
authors?  (So that it's legal to distribute *and* modify them?)

Thanks
-- 
Rob Browning
rlb @defaultvalue.org and @debian.org; previously @cs.utexas.edu
GPG starting 2002-11-03 = 14DD 432F AE39 534D B592  F9A0 25C8 D377 8C7E 73A4

Re: Copyrights on various (mostly etc/) files.

[Richard Stallman]

    In particular, there was some concern over files like JOKES,
    yow.lines, COOKIES, etc.  Have these been GPLed by the relevant
    authors?  (So that it's legal to distribute *and* modify them?)

We got rid of yow.lines.  JOKES and COOKIES are the sort of minor
thing we can use as long as the authors don't complain.

Re: Copyrights on various (mostly etc/) files.

[Rob Browning]

Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> writes:

>     In particular, there was some concern over files like JOKES,
>     yow.lines, COOKIES, etc.  Have these been GPLed by the relevant
>     authors?  (So that it's legal to distribute *and* modify them?)
>
> We got rid of yow.lines.

Ahh, I see.  I had checked for the file in CVS, but hadn't looked *in*
the file.

> JOKES and COOKIES are the sort of minor thing we can use as long as
> the authors don't complain.

Would it be correct or incorrect to assume that those two files, along
with INTERVIEW and MOTIVATION, should be considered to be under
something more like a verbatim only license (like CENSORSHIP and
WHY-FREE) rather than being freely modifiable?

Thanks very much for the help.
-- 
Rob Browning
rlb @defaultvalue.org and @debian.org; previously @cs.utexas.edu
GPG starting 2002-11-03 = 14DD 432F AE39 534D B592  F9A0 25C8 D377 8C7E 73A4

Re: Copyrights on various (mostly etc/) files.

[Richard Stallman]

    Would it be correct or incorrect to assume that those two files, along
    with INTERVIEW and MOTIVATION, should be considered to be under
    something more like a verbatim only license (like CENSORSHIP and
    WHY-FREE) rather than being freely modifiable?

These files are NOT all the same kind of case.

Re: Copyrights on various (mostly etc/) files.

[Rob Browning]

Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> writes:

> These files are NOT all the same kind of case.

Certainly, I didn't mean to say that they were, but what I was asking
is whether or not JOKES, COOKIES, INTERVIEW, and MOTIVATION are freely
modifiable or not.  Files like CENSORSHIP make this explicit; the
above files do not.

Thanks
-- 
Rob Browning
rlb @defaultvalue.org and @debian.org; previously @cs.utexas.edu
GPG starting 2002-11-03 = 14DD 432F AE39 534D B592  F9A0 25C8 D377 8C7E 73A4