*** empty log message ***

[bpt/emacs.git] / admin / notes / copyright

diff --git a/admin/notes/copyright b/admin/notes/copyright
index ce89539..3f23249 100644 (file)
--- a/admin/notes/copyright
+++ b/admin/notes/copyright
@@ -228,6 +228,8 @@ lisp/play/tetris.el
   the concept.
   rms: "My understanding is that game rules as such are not copyrightable."
   <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2007-01/msg00960.html>
+  But then this issue came up again:
+  <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2007-05/msg00016.html>
 
 lispref/doclicense.texi
 man/doclicense.texi
@@ -405,6 +407,7 @@ lisp/term/README
   Accordingly, FSF copyright was added.
 
 src/unexhp9k800.c  (and dependent src/m/sr2k.h)
+  http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2007-02/msg00138.html
   - briefly removed due to legal uncertainly Jan-Mar 2007. The
   relevant assignment is under "hp9k800" in copyright.list. File was
   written by John V. Morris at HP, and disclaimed by the author and
@@ -549,9 +552,6 @@ system)
     Emacs 22 is released (though if they can be fixed before, that is
     obviously good):
 
-Maybe some relevant comments here?
-<http://groups.google.com/group/linux.debian.legal/browse_thread/thread/123547ea95437a1f>
-
 
 Is it OK to just `cvs remove' a file for legal reasons, or is
 something more drastic needed? A removed file is still available from
@@ -586,17 +586,13 @@ etc/TUTORIAL* (translations)
 Done: TUTORIAL.eo
 
 
-REMOVED src/unexhp9k800.c
-  - we would like to re-add this file if possible. Please let us know
-  if you can clarify its legal status.
-  http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2007-02/msg00138.html
-
-
 *** These are copyright issues still to be addressed:
 
 python.el potential legal problem
 http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-pretest-bug/2007-04/msg00459.html
 
+tetris trademark?
+http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2007-05/msg00016.html
 
 \f
 This file is part of GNU Emacs.