diff etc/GNU @ 90182:f042e7c0fe20

Revision: [e-mail]--gnu-2005/emacs--unicode--0--patch-53 Merge from emacs--cvs-trunk--0 Patches applied: * emacs--cvs-trunk--0 (patch 302-319) - Update from CVS - Merge from gnus--rel--5.10 * gnus--rel--5.10 (patch 69) - Update from CVS

--- a/etc/GNU	Fri May 13 03:40:13 2005 +0000
+++ b/etc/GNU	Fri May 20 04:22:05 2005 +0000
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-Copyright (C) 1985, 1993, 2003 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
+Copyright (C) 1985, 1993, 2003, 2005 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
 
    Permission is granted to anyone to make or distribute verbatim copies
 of this document, in any medium, provided that the copyright notice and
@@ -446,7 +446,7 @@
    The sale of teaching, hand-holding and maintenance services could
 also employ programmers.
 
-   People with new ideas could distribute programs as freeware, asking
+   People with new ideas could distribute programs as freeware(7), asking
 for donations from satisfied users, or selling hand-holding services.
 I have met people who are already working this way successfully.
 
@@ -518,23 +518,26 @@
 
    (3)  Several such companies now exist.
 
-   (4)  The Free Software Foundation raises most of its funds from a
-distribution service, although it is a charity rather than a company.
-If *no one* chooses to obtain copies by ordering from the FSF, it
-will be unable to do its work.  But this does not mean that proprietary
-restrictions are justified to force every user to pay.  If a small
-fraction of all the users order copies from the FSF, that is sufficient
-to keep the FSF afloat.  So we ask users to choose to support us in
-this way.  Have you done your part?
+   (4)  The Free Software Foundation raised most of its funds for 10
+years from a distribution service, although it is a charity rather
+than a company.
 
-   (5)  A group of computer companies recently pooled funds to support
-maintenance of the GNU C Compiler.
+   (5) A group of computer companies pooled funds around 1991 to
+support maintenance of the GNU C Compiler.
 
    (6) In the 80s I had not yet realized how confusing it was to speak
 of "the issue" of "intellectual property".  That term is obviously
 biased; more subtle is the fact that it lumps together various
 disparate laws which raise very different issues.  Nowadays I urge
 people to reject the term "intellectual property" entirely, lest it
-lead others to suppose this is one coherent issue.  The way to be
+lead others to suppose that those laws form one coherent issue.  The way to be
 clear is to to discuss patents, copyrights, and trademarks separately.
-See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html.
\ No newline at end of file
+See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/not-ipr.xhtml for more explanation
+of how this term spreads confusion and bias.
+
+   (7) In 1985 I had not yet recognized the importance of distinguishing
+between "free software" and "freeware".  The term "freeware" means
+software you are free to redistribute, but usually you are not free to study
+and change the source code, so most of it is not free software.
+See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html for more
+explanation.