[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug#227159: ocaml: license conflict in Emacs Lisp support?

On Wed, Jan 21, 2004 at 03:21:49PM -0500, Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
> On Jan 15, 2004, at 08:08, Henning Makholm wrote:
> >Scripsit Anthony DeRobertis <asd@suespammers.org>
> >
> >>If the .el source files use copyrightable material from emacs, be it
> >>copyrightable APIs,
> >
> >Since when is an API protected by copyright? And where?
> Finally found it again!
> http://homepages.law.asu.edu/~dkarjala/cyberlaw/ 
> PosSoftwareVNewCentury(DBstructures)(NDTex2003).htm
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2003/debian-legal-200311/ 
> msg00033.html


How does this relate to (override, narrow, whatever) the
precedent set by Lotus vs. Borland (the famous case about
Quattro Pro reproducing the "Look and Feel" of Lotus-1-2-3,
partially because it was also the Lotus-1-2-3 macro language

Acknowledgement: Lotus, Lotus-1-2-3 and IBM are believed to be a
trademarks of IBM, Borland is believed to be a trademark of
Borland.  Quattro Pro is believed to be a trademark once
belonging to Borland, but now possibly transfered to another

This message is hastily written, please ignore any unpleasant wordings,
do not consider it a binding commitment, even if its phrasing may
indicate so. Its contents may be deliberately or accidentally untrue.
Trademarks and other things belong to their owners, if any.

Reply to: