Re: ox-html.el removal

[Alan L Tyree <alantyree@gmail.com>]

On 11/03/13 06:30, Christopher Schmidt wrote:
> Detlef Steuer <detlef.steuer@gmx.de> writes:
>> But: The papers the FSF asked you to sign were constructed for exactly
>> this case I assume.
>
> That's not right.
>
>      https://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-assign.html
>
> I am not a copyright lawyer.  So is everyone else subscribed to this
> list.  The FSF's copyright clerk should assist on this issue.

That may be why the FSF *wants* copyright, but that hardly matters. The 
fact is (I presume) that copyright *was* assigned to the FSF and 
therefore the FSF is the entity that can determine the rights of copy, 
distribution, etc of the code.

This is very common in publishing: the author is asked to assign 
copyright to the publisher, and it is then the publisher who has rights 
formerly held by the author.

Cheers,
Alan


>
> #+BEGIN my2cents
> If Jambunathan does not want code he wrote to be part of Org any more,
> I'd respect his wish.  At first sight this is a loss for Org.  This
> does not need to be the end, though.  GSoC is coming up, rewriting
> specific exporter look like great projects.
>
> Jambunathan did not mention what is going to happen to his code.
>
> Jambu, are you going to maintain the code you wrote separately.  If so,
> is code free, libre and upwards compatible to future Org releases?
> #+END
>
> A long yet somewhat relevant read:
>
>      https://lwn.net/Articles/529522/
>      http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.encryption.gpg.gnutls.devel/6465
>
>          Christopher
>
>


-- 
Alan L Tyree                    http://www2.austlii.edu.au/~alan
Tel:  04 2748 6206		sip:172385@iptel.org