Re: Important: ILISP License Change Questionnaire

Ok. New attempt:

 >Question 3: - DO YOU OBJECT TO HAVING ANY COPYRIGHTS THAT YOU OWN IN
 >THE ILISP-PROJECT BEING REASSIGNED TO THE FREE SOFTWARE FEDERATION? -
 >(BENEFITS OF REASSIGNMENT CAN BE FOUND FOUND AT THE URL
 >-  http://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-assign.html AND ARE REPRODUCED IN
 >-  APPENDIX 3)

No.

 >>>Question 3: - DO YOU OBJECT TO HAVING ANY COPYRIGHTS THAT YOU OWN IN
 >>>THE ILISP-PROJECT BEING REASSIGNED TO THE FREE SOFTWARE FEDERATION? -
 >>>(BENEFITS OF REASSIGNMENT CAN BE FOUND FOUND AT THE URL
 >>>-  http://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-assign.html AND ARE REPRODUCED IN
 >>>-  APPENDIX 3)
 >>
 >>Yes. I prefer the ilisp license (and the XEmacs license over the GPL).
 >>See Q2.


Daniel Barlow schrieb:
> Reini Urban <[email protected]> writes:
>>>Question 3: - DO YOU OBJECT TO HAVING ANY COPYRIGHTS THAT YOU OWN IN
>>>THE ILISP-PROJECT BEING REASSIGNED TO THE FREE SOFTWARE FEDERATION? -
>>>(BENEFITS OF REASSIGNMENT CAN BE FOUND FOUND AT THE URL
>>>-  http://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-assign.html AND ARE REPRODUCED IN
>>>-  APPENDIX 3)
>>
>>Yes. I prefer the ilisp license (and the XEmacs license over the GPL).
>>See Q2.
> 
> The XEmacs license _is_ the GPL, at least according to their web site.
> Given that the project started life as a fork of the FSF's Emacs, it's
> hard to see how they could have changed this.
> 
> I don't wish to start a flamewar over the merits of copyright
> assignment, about which people may have legitimate differences, but I
> do think it's important to be clear that we're talking about copyright
> assignment and not about the license itself.
> 
> If indeed we _are_ talking about copyright assignment...
-- 
Reini Urban
http://xarch.tu-graz.ac.at/home/rurban/



-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by: 
Battle your brains against the best in the Thawte Crypto 
Challenge. Be the first to crack the code - register now: 
http://www.gothawte.com/rd521.html