Raymond Toy writes:
> >>>>> "Richard" == Richard Fateman <fateman@cs.berkeley.edu> writes:
>
> Richard> 2. The Macsyma source code circa 1982 is not
> Richard> covered by the Gnu public license. It is at
> Richard> this point FREE software. Byt contrast, the Gnu software
>
> Is that really true? If so, then why did Bill Schelter need to get
> that letter from the DOE? There must have been at least some
> confusion on the true legal status of that code.
I can clarify this point. I think I may have started this...
Back in the 90's I was considering distributing Maxima commercially,
as a low-cost free-software alternative to the proprietary systems.
At that time the source code was on the GNU CDROM with no indication
of the license. So I had some concerns about potentially infringing
on the rights of Macsyma Inc, DOE or others.
I wrote a letter to the FSF asking if they could get a written
statement of the license -- to minimise my potential liability.
Of course, this took a long time and I moved on to other projects.
Another person followed up on it, doing more work than me to chase it
up, and eventually this resulted in the letter from DOE.
regards,
Brian Gough