Antonio,
I resent the insinuation that I plagarized POSIX. I did not. Run the
same DeepSeek-V4-Flash prompt against my ed.info and it concludes:
[The] overlap is real, but it is overlap at the level of facts, ideas,
methods, and the command language itself — not copyrightable
expression.
You have shown disrespect for historical precedent, ignorance of Unix
standards, general incompetence as maintainer of GNU ed, and now you
flaunt Copyright law. If RMS does not take action, then I have to
accept that as abdication of his leaderhip role.
On 9/15/26 13:49, Antonio Diaz Diaz wrote:
Dear Andrew,
Andrew L. Moore wrote:
On 9/9/26 10:00, Antonio Diaz Diaz wrote:
Andrew L. Moore wrote:
Antonio, you delete my open source manual and distribute POSIX, a
Copyrighted work, verbatim under GNU Copyleft. Please cease and
desist.
Andrew, please, could you tell me what is the POSIX that I am
distributing "verbatim under GNU Copyleft" so that I can fix the
situation? Thanks.
Your uncertainty should be a big red flag to RMS. Ordinarily, I
wouldn't discuss legal matters on a public forum, but since you asked
on a public forum, here goes. DeepSeek-V4-Flash, after comparing your
ed.info against the POSIX ed spec, concludes:
Bottom line: the GNU ed manual contains substantial passages that
are near-verbatim copies of the POSIX ed specification text,
lightly edited.
Of course all the manuals for ed are very similar because they describe the
same program, most of them have a common origin, and much convergent evolution
has happened in them as ed itself changed along the years. I myself have
contributed to the POSIX ed specification.
The current GNU ed manual is just your GNU ed-0.2 manual[1] with 20 years of
changes. The manual that you distributed with GNU ed-0.2 (ed.texinfo) clearly
states that the copyright owner is the FSF:
Copyright (C) 1993 by the Free Software Foundation, Inc.
[...]
@author by Andrew Moore
Therefore, when the FSF asked me to change the license of ed.texinfo to the
GFDL I just did it.
If you feel that the FSF does not have the right to change the license of the
manual that you gave to them, you should talk with them. Given the historical
value of ed, I would be happy to restore your permissive license in the GNU ed
manual.
http://download.savannah.gnu.org/releases/ed/ed-0.2.tar.gz
Best regards,
Antonio.
