From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Marcin Borkowski Subject: Re: Org-mode exporters licensing Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2015 13:50:46 +0200 Message-ID: <87si89vmy1.fsf@mbork.pl> References: <87io962fdz.fsf@mbork.pl> <87mvyixbga.fsf@gmx.us> <87fv4a2egg.fsf@mbork.pl> <87a8uixakf.fsf@gmx.us> <878ua22cns.fsf@mbork.pl> <87pp3eexwi.fsf@ucl.ac.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:52661) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZJgvr-00050l-P0 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 27 Jul 2015 07:51:00 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZJgvn-0007HU-L1 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 27 Jul 2015 07:50:59 -0400 Received: from mail.mojserwer.eu ([2a01:5e00:2:52::8]:43920) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZJgvn-0007Fv-EF for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 27 Jul 2015 07:50:55 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.mojserwer.eu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9300A8F2003 for ; Mon, 27 Jul 2015 13:50:50 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail.mojserwer.eu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.mojserwer.eu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id azcQY59hnl8u for ; Mon, 27 Jul 2015 13:50:48 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost (unknown [109.232.24.146]) by mail.mojserwer.eu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 75BA28F2002 for ; Mon, 27 Jul 2015 13:50:48 +0200 (CEST) In-reply-to: <87pp3eexwi.fsf@ucl.ac.uk> List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org On 2015-07-27, at 11:46, Eric S Fraga wrote: > On Monday, 27 Jul 2015 at 11:05, Marcin Borkowski wrote: > > [...] > >> Frankly speaking, I'm rather astonished at your and Eric's answers. >> I treated my question as a formality, and expected answers like "Of >> course you can do it, don't be silly." > > Oh, sorry! I thought you actually did want to get some feedback on > this. I'm not bothered at all what you do with your code ;-). ;-) Well, I did want that. I just didn't expect this... > Some of us, for better or for worse, have lived through the whole > development of "open source", "free software", "public domain". I > release my first software as "pd" back in the late 70s! Back then, the > main worry was about implied warranties and not software > freedom. Different world... I guess. > And, by the way, copyright and licensing are two completely different > issues (in response to an earlier email of yours in this thread)... True. I should have said (probably) "intellectual property law". Notice how the very name contains a lie: there is no such thing as "intellectual property", since "intellectual" things are not material and thus cannot be a "property" at all. And now I have another question, but I'll put in in a separate thread, I guess. > cheers, > eric Best, -- Marcin Borkowski http://octd.wmi.amu.edu.pl/en/Marcin_Borkowski Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science Adam Mickiewicz University