Re: The copyright issue

[Uday S Reddy]

> > Anybody, including a private corporation, can use the FSF codebase to
> > develop their variants, but Gnu Emacs can't use their enhancements to
> > enrich itself.

I am sorry.  The intent of my statement was:

Anybody can use the FSF codebase to develop their variants, but Gnu Emacs can't 
use their enhancements to enrich itself unless they assign the copyright to FSF.

Having titled my post "the copyright issue" I forgot to mention copyright again.

It seemed to me from from Stephen's statement that David Reitter's enhancements 
had aspects that could not be copyrighted by FSF.  But there are also other 
instances where the problem is acute, e.g., in taking stuff from XEmacs or in 
including VM in the Gnu distribution etc.

In all cases, it is the free software that I am talking about.  It seems odd to 
me that Gnu and FSF do not simply embrace all forms of free software.

> That is not inherently the case.  GNU Emacs (and many other of the GNU
> projects that enforce the FSF copyright policy) does include
> enhancements provided by private corporations.  The corporation simply
> has to sign the necessary paperwork, which they usually do without much
> trouble.

I am really glad to hear that corporations do that.  But it might actually be 
easier for corporations to sign over the copyright than it is for private 
groups.  Many people contribute over the years and they get dispersed.  Even if 
one of them is unable or unwilling to assign copyright to FSF, Gnu has to stay 
away.  So, it seems that Gnu has needlessly isolated itself on an island from 
which it cannot escape.  There is an ocean of free software outside Gnu, but 
Gnu can't touch it.  Isn't it absurd?

Cheers,
Uday