(url-current-object, url-package-name, url-package-version): Add defvars.

[gnu-emacs] / man / gnu.texi

diff --git a/man/gnu.texi b/man/gnu.texi
index d28a4dd0350b8afc18ae196150a68b88d2a0cbc0..51e1a5615ffee190b2c21a82a91128ebac11b096 100644 (file)
--- a/man/gnu.texi
+++ b/man/gnu.texi
@@ -1,11 +1,13 @@
 @c This is part of the Emacs manual.
-@c Copyright (C) 1985, 1986, 1987, 1993, 1995 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
+@c Copyright (C) 1985, 1986, 1987, 1993, 1995, 2002, 2003, 2004,
+@c   2005 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
 @ifclear justgnu
 @node Manifesto,, MS-DOS, Top
 @unnumbered The GNU Manifesto
 @end ifclear
 @ifset justgnu
-Copyright (C) 1985, 1993, 2001 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
+Copyright (C) 1985, 1993, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004,
+   2005 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
 
 Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document
 under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.1 or
@@ -382,13 +384,13 @@ other people's lives; and it is usually used to make their lives more
 difficult.
 
 People who have studied the issue of intellectual property
-rights@footnote{n the 80s I had not yet realized how confusing it was
+rights@footnote{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 that those laws form one coherent
-issue.  The way to be clear is to to discuss patents, copyrights, and
+issue.  The way to be clear is to discuss patents, copyrights, and
 trademarks separately.  See
 @uref{http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/not-ipr.xhtml} for more
 explanation of how this term spreads confusion and bias.} carefully