1 files changed, 2 insertions, 1 deletions
diff --git a/data/samples/generic/free_as_in_freedom_2.richard_stallman_and_the_free_software_revolution.sam_williams.richard_stallman.sst b/data/samples/generic/free_as_in_freedom_2.richard_stallman_and_the_free_software_revolution.sam_williams.richard_stallman.sst
index d28b9f2..529f42e 100644
--- a/data/samples/generic/free_as_in_freedom_2.richard_stallman_and_the_free_software_revolution.sam_williams.richard_stallman.sst
+++ b/data/samples/generic/free_as_in_freedom_2.richard_stallman_and_the_free_software_revolution.sam_williams.richard_stallman.sst
@@ -23,6 +23,7 @@
  { @ Barnes & Noble }http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?isbn=0596002874
 
 @make:
+% :headings: none; none; none; Chapter;
  :breaks: new=:A,:B,:C,1
  :home_button_text: {Free as in Freedom 2.0}http://stallman.org/; {Free Software Foundation}http://www.fsf.org
  :footer: {Free as in Freedom 2.0}http://stallman.org/; {Free Software Foundation}http://www.fsf.org
@@ -1152,7 +1153,7 @@ At first, the other hackers continued spending some of their time at MIT, and co
 On March 16, 1982, a date Stallman remembers well because it was his birthday, Symbolics executives ended the gentleman's agreement. The motive was to attack LMI. LMI had fewer hackers, and fewer staff in general, so the Symbolics executives thought that LMI was getting the main benefit of sharing the system improvements. By ending the sharing of system code, they hoped to wipe out LMI. So they decided to enforce the letter of the license. Instead of contributing their improvements to the MIT version of the system, which LMI could use, they provided MIT with a copy of the Symbolics version of the system for users at MIT to run. Anyone using it would provide the service of testing only to Symbolics, and if he made improvements, most likely they too would only be useful for Symbolics.
 
 As the person responsible (with help from Greenblatt for the first couple of months) for keeping up the lab's Lisp Machine system, Stallman was incensed. The Symbolics hackers had left the system code with hundreds of half-made changes that caused errors. Viewing this announcement as an "ultimatum," he retaliated by disconnecting Symbolics' microwave communications link to the laboratory. He then vowed never to work on a Symbolics machine, and pledged to continue the development of MIT's system so as to defend LMI from Symbolics. "The way I saw it, the AI Lab was a neutral country, like Belgium in World War II," Stallman says. "If Germany invades Belgium, Belgium declares war on Germany and sides with Britain and France."
-% ={DARPA;Greenblat, Richard;LISP programming language:operating system for+4;MACLISP language;McCarthy, John;Project MAC;Stanford Artificial Intelligence Laboratory}
+={DARPA;Greenblat, Richard;LISP programming language:operating system for+4;MACLISP language;McCarthy, John;Project MAC;Stanford Artificial Intelligence Laboratory}
 
 When Symbolics executives noticed that their latest features were still appearing in the MIT Lisp Machine system and, by extension, the LMI Lisp machine, they were not pleased. Stallman knew what copyright law required, and was rewriting the features from scratch.He took advantage of the opportunity to read the source code Symbolics supplied to MIT, so as to understand the problems and fixes, and then made sure to write his changes in a totally different way. But the Symbolics executives didn't believe this. They installed a "spy" program on Stallman's computer terminal looking for evidence against him. However, when they took their case to MIT administration, around the start of 1983, they had little evidence to present: a dozen places in the sources where both versions had been changed and appeared similar.
 ={Brain Makers: Genius, Ego, and Greed in the Quest for Machines that Think, The Newquist;Newquist, Harvey}