Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!harvard!caip!lll-crg!lll-lcc!ucdavis!ucbvax!ucsfcgl!ucsfcca!root
From: root@ucsfcca.UUCP (Computer Center)
Newsgroups: net.emacs,net.sources.d,net.news.group
Subject: Re: distributing gnu - let's think about this
Message-ID: <506@ucsfcca.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 7-May-86 20:02:23 EDT
Article-I.D.: ucsfcca.506
Posted: Wed May  7 20:02:23 1986
Date-Received: Sun, 11-May-86 04:22:56 EDT
References: <1211@burl.UUCP> <5373@alice.uUCp>
Organization: UCSF Computer Center
Lines: 29
Xref: linus net.emacs:1899 net.sources.d:182 net.news.group:4793

> It's worse that that.  I think that employee of many companies won't
> even be allowed to *use* Gnu.  Consider: you are only allowed to use it
> if you agree that any changes you make will be generally distributed.
> But your employer quite reasonably wants to be able to withhold from
> general distribution any work they're paying you for.  Impasse!

One of us doesn't understand the GNU agreement.

It appears to me that you don't have to distribute any changes you make
for your own use (your company's in-house use). But if you do want to
supply a changed version to someone else it must be offered under the
same terms as the original version.

That is, what you offer must be redistributable free, include source or
the offer of source, no charges for the modifications (reimbursement
for distribution costs is explicitly permitted), the changes made must
be clearly identified, and you must include the original agreement
and availability announcement.

Stallman's summary is:

   In other words, you are welcome to use, share and improve GNU Emacs.
   You are forbidden to forbid anyone else to use, share and improve
   what you give them.

If I misunderstand, will someone who really knows supply us all with
the correct information.

Thos Sumner    (...ucbvax!ucsfcgl!ucsfcca.UCSF!thos)