Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!cos!hqda-ai!merlin
From: merlin@hqda-ai.UUCP (David S. Hayes)
Newsgroups: comp.emacs
Subject: Re: The Selling of GNU Emacs
Message-ID: <538@hqda-ai.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 17-Nov-87 07:59:45 EST
Article-I.D.: hqda-ai.538
Posted: Tue Nov 17 07:59:45 1987
Date-Received: Thu, 19-Nov-87 07:09:19 EST
References: <530@hqda-ai.UUCP>
Organization: Army AI Center, Pentagon
Lines: 49
Summary: Apologies and Clarifications


     This is a bit of a note to the net in general, and the folks
as Austin Code Works (ACW) in particular.  For background info,
see the referenced article.

First, to ACW:
==============
     My original posting has been wildly mis-interpreted, which is
my own fault for not being clear in the first place.  I did jump
the gun a bit.  Later information shows that ACW is in fact in
compliance with both the letter and spirit of the GNU license.
For the implications that ACW is somehow stealing the efforts of
the Free Software Foundation, my apologies.  (Munch, mumble, hard
to speak clearly around all that shoe leather.)

Now, to the Net, including ACW:
===============================
     My intention was to suggest that for FSF to hire a lawyer to
protect GNU was unnecessary.  By following the terms of the GNU
license, instead of the more restrictive vendor's license, the
users of a product based on a hijacked GNU could effectively
liberate it.  (Again, ACW did NOT steal GNU.  Not even close.)  I
think this kind of action is quite defensible, given the terms of
the GNU license.

     There is also something to be learned here.  The normal
practice of a software vendor is to use a restrictive license.
When we see an advertisement for a software product, it is quite
reasonable to assume that this type of license applies.  When that
same advertisement proclaims that the product is based on GNU,
confusion, and worse, results.  In the end, it turns out that ACW
did some very nice things here, but no one knew about them until
after the flames hit the net.

     When using GNU as the basis of a commercial product, it would
be very helpful if the software vendor would somehow let us know
that they are applying the terms of the GNU license.  I understand
that space in an ad comes dear, and the marketing types won't want
to pay for it just to satisfy a bunch of hackers on some net.  I
suggest that the net itself should be used for propagation of this
information.  A short posting to comp.emacs or comp.newprod would
provide much more information than a 1/4-page ad, and would open a
channel between the users and the vendors.
     
     Besides, that would have meant I still had a pair of shoes
without teeth marks.
-- 
David S. Hayes, The Merlin of Avalon	PhoneNet:  (202) 694-6900
UUCP:  *!uunet!cos!hqda-ai!merlin	ARPA:  ai01@hios-pent.arpa