Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site masscomp.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!masscomp!z
From: [email protected] (Steve Zimmerman)
Newsgroups: net.emacs
Subject: Re: GNU Emacs
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, 28-Jun-85 09:05:21 EDT
Article-I.D.: masscomp.733
Posted: Fri Jun 28 09:05:21 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 29-Jun-85 01:26:09 EDT
References: <[email protected]>
Organization: Masscomp - Westford, MA
Lines: 25
> From: Richard M. Stallman
> For example, just by looking at Zimmerman's messages, you can see
> that his goal is to convince you of the most restrictive interpretation
> of the law at every juncture--to get you to forfeit as much as possible.
I challenge you to find an attorney who has a "less restrictive"
interpretation of the law in this case. This just happens to be the way
the law is interpreted by the courts.
> This is the kind of attitude that people develop when they make a
> habit of profiting from interfering with other people.
In an earlier message, I urged you to rewrite those portions of GNU
Emacs containing Gosling's code. Now that you are doing so, I am quite
satisfied, and once this is finished, I can see no legal reason for
someone not to use GNU Emacs. I fail to see how I have profited from
this. To the contrary, it seems to be your users who have profited, for
they will soon be able to use GNU Emacs without doubts as to its legal
status. Since UniPress apparently helped you come to your decision, I
cannot see why they should be condemned. I think most of your users
would prefer to wait a little bit longer for the GNU Emacs manual in
order to have a product that is free from questions about its legality.
Steve Zimmerman
Masscomp