From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "B. T. Raven" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: Basic legal question: Publication of a fix to psgml Date: Wed, 03 Apr 2013 12:04:43 -0500 Organization: NewsGuy - Unlimited Usenet $23.95 Message-ID: References: <51584E07.8060709@easy-emacs.de> <87ppydxqh4.fsf@scipolis.de> <515BE043.8030900@easy-emacs.de> <87r4isxcs8.fsf@yandex.ru> <515BE542.80807@easy-emacs.de> <877gkkxbio.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1365059239 18197 80.91.229.3 (4 Apr 2013 07:07:19 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2013 07:07:19 +0000 (UTC) To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Apr 04 09:07:46 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1UNeGq-0007VI-A5 for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 04 Apr 2013 09:07:40 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:34653 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UNeGR-0005t4-CN for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 04 Apr 2013 03:07:15 -0400 Original-Path: usenet.stanford.edu!news.glorb.com!npeer02.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!spln!extra.newsguy.com!newsp.newsguy.com!news4 Original-Newsgroups: gnu.emacs.help Original-Lines: 86 Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: pcf86e9b139e5a68afce18285f9e0458c4737b4fbe93f6f44.newsdawg.com User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:15.0) Gecko/20120907 Thunderbird/15.0.1 In-Reply-To: X-Received-Bytes: 4084 Original-Xref: usenet.stanford.edu gnu.emacs.help:197688 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 04 Apr 2013 03:07:03 -0400 X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:89971 Archived-At: Die Wed Apr 03 2013 07:03:40 GMT-0500 (Central Daylight Time) Andreas Röhler scripsit: > Am 03.04.2013 10:29, schrieb Bastien: >> Hi Andreas, >> >> Andreas Röhler writes: >> >>> CA, as we learned, is partly privately negotiated. >> >> Not to my knowledge. >> > > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2013-04/msg00066.html > > BTW experienced that proceeding already years ago, which is just polite > and correct as such. > >> The copyright assignment is signed by contributors. I'm not aware of >> any negociations, and I'd be surprised to learn that there are private >> negociations. >> >>> To evaluate the legal state of different parts in Emacs wrt CA will >>> need one or more lawyers. >> >> This suggests that the copyright status of Emacs is uncertain. > > Law and legal stats differ in theory and reality. > In theory more laws define more cases and should provide more security. > In reality the realm of possible interpretation is expanded too. > >> >> I hope you understand it is quite a serious statement and requires >> some evidence. >> >> The copyright status for code in Org's code is very clear, and I think >> this is also the case for the copyright status of the rest of Emacs. >> I sometimes get impatient when I have to wait for the FSF Copyright >> Clerk to handle new copyright assignments for a new contributor, but >> I know he has a lot of work and he's doing a great job. >> > > To know the copyright status as such --as assignments may differ-- you > must read assignment by assignment, evaluate and understand the diffs > correctly - > which is absurd as IMHO the whole CA arts. > > BTW German law --Urheberrechtsgesetz-- for example declares non-valid > such copyright assignments - even if signed. > Will a US-court accept CA from a German, when german law declares CA > possible? Your English is so good that I can't tell whether you are a native speaker or not. Did you mean to write "if (wenn) German law declares CA IMpossible"? I'm sure the FSF's lawyers know about the status of German law, don't they? In any case, donative assignments are so legally thorny that any discussion of them should probably be limited to private communication with RMS or between/among the FSF's lawyers in camera. > > Read Article 32 > Equitable remuneration > > http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_urhg/englisch_urhg.html#p0157 > > I.e. GPL is not affected, as "anyone" matches. Will the FSF count as > "anyone"? It will certainly count under U.S. law now that Microsoft enjoys the use of a virtual mind and soul (i.e. is even more of a person than any corporation was under the personification doctrine established after the Civil War). It can now have political opinions an can spend virtually unlimited amounts of money to make those opinions heard. Sorry, off topic but interesting. Ed > > Best, > > Andreas > > >