Re: Preparation of Debian GNU/Linux 3.0r2 (II)

Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb: > On Mon, Dec 01, 2003 at 05:39:02PM -0800, Don Armstrong wrote: >> >> In effect, the computer program itself (eg, the TrueType part is >> protected) but the output of the program is not. > > So it should be possible to reverse-engineer and reimplemen

Re: Preparation of Debian GNU/Linux 3.0r2 (II)

On Mon, Dec 01, 2003 at 05:39:02PM -0800, Don Armstrong wrote: > The key to this decision is: > > A computer program is defined by the Copyright Act as "a set of > statements or instructions to be used directly or indirectly in a > computer to bring about a certain result." 17 U.S.C. §

Re: Preparation of Debian GNU/Linux 3.0r2 (II)

On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 04:14:43AM +0300, Alexander Cherepanov wrote: > The fun thing is that outlines also are "the data that merely > represents...", so Type1 and TrueType fonts should not be > copyrightable. AFAIU the only thing there that may be copyrightable is > advanced hinting which really

Re: Preparation of Debian GNU/Linux 3.0r2 (II)

On Tue, 02 Dec 2003, Alexander Cherepanov wrote: > The sad thing is that Adobe v. SSI was judged > (http://web.archive.org/web/20010303011442/http://www.bna.com/e-law/cases/adobe.html) > other way. How is it possible is beyond my understanding. For > comments see http://jeff.cs.mcgill.ca/~luc/kinch

Re: Preparation of Debian GNU/Linux 3.0r2 (II)

25-Nov-03 15:04 Don Armstrong wrote: > Can someone who holds that non-trivial bitmap fonts [eg. fonts larger > than ~4x5 pixels] cannot be copyrighted please walk through the > rational for their position? [Ideally including case law citations.] 1. Typeface is not copyrightable because its artisti

Re: Preparation of Debian GNU/Linux 3.0r2 (II)

27-Nov-03 05:24 Anthony DeRobertis wrote: > On Nov 24, 2003, at 11:15, GOTO Masanori wrote: >> So it's hard to make Japanese characters which have beautiful shape >> and unified baseline because each form is complex, and there are a lot >> of such complicated characters. > Well, at the risk of sta

Re: Preparation of Debian GNU/Linux 3.0r2 (II)

> It *is* a problem for my hypothetical user that he has to wade through > his scripts and add "-replacement" in various places. And who is even > telling him that he needs to? It is possible that the fonts are only > used in special cases, which are not among the one he tests before > putting his

Re: Preparation of Debian GNU/Linux 3.0r2 (II)

Scripsit Junichi Uekawa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > We are handing over the worries on the mirror distributors hands; It seems to be widely accepted in the thread that no legal worry that may be handed over to to anyone has been satisfactorily demonstrated. > and Debian JP project is informed that at

Re: Preparation of Debian GNU/Linux 3.0r2 (II)

On Sat, Nov 29, 2003 at 08:45:09PM +0100, Osamu Aoki wrote: > > We distribute software that infringes potentially thousands of software > > patents, and apply the same policy: if there is no reason to believe > > the patent will be enforced in court, the patent should be treated as if > > it did

Re: Preparation of Debian GNU/Linux 3.0r2 (II)

Hello, > I was talking (or at least, thinking) about unstable/testing. I think > removing from *stable* is a much more serious matter. It ought only to > happen if a plausible case can be made that keeping the package/file > in the distribution can actively harm users and/or mirror operators. W

Re: Preparation of Debian GNU/Linux 3.0r2 (II)

Scripsit Osamu Aoki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > As long as the removal request clearly recognizes that this request/innuendo > by the Hitachi is found to be baseless, I think we should remove these > old fonts as useless dataset. > I think previous message by Henning Makholm also think this way. > Me

Re: Preparation of Debian GNU/Linux 3.0r2 (II)

Hi Steve, On Thu, Nov 20, 2003 at 02:21:56PM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Thu, Nov 20, 2003 at 12:41:13PM +0900, Kenshi Muto wrote: > What license does it violate? None. But let's defocus from Hitachi. > > Dead-copy should be removed also. Hitachi/Typebank continue to sell > > original fon

Re: Preparation of Debian GNU/Linux 3.0r2 (II)

Hi, On Sat, Nov 29, 2003 at 04:18:20AM -0500, Anthony DeRobertis wrote: > On Thu, 2003-11-27 at 18:00, Osamu Aoki wrote: ... > > But US is not the only country in the world. > > No, it's not. Thankfully. Otherwise, I'd never be able to play DVDs > under Linux :-) > > It does however happen to be

Re: Preparation of Debian GNU/Linux 3.0r2 (II)

On Thu, 2003-11-27 at 18:00, Osamu Aoki wrote: > What? I wonder your intent for this OT statement :-( A tongue-in-cheek joke. Nothing more. Ask me about English sometime. > > When you discuss things with non-native audience, safer choice of > language reduces frictions. This statement caused

Re: Preparation of Debian GNU/Linux 3.0r2 (II)

On Thu, Nov 27, 2003 at 05:24:47AM -0500, Anthony DeRobertis wrote: > On Nov 24, 2003, at 11:15, GOTO Masanori wrote: > > >So it's hard to make Japanese characters which have beautiful shape > >and unified baseline because each form is complex, and there are a lot > >of such complicated characters

Re: Preparation of Debian GNU/Linux 3.0r2 (II)

On Nov 25, 2003, at 18:04, Don Armstrong wrote: I'm not sure that Fiest v Rural Telephone can lead us down this road. It doesn't, not at all. Assuming the font is a work of authorship (which many large or relatively large bitmap and TT fonts are) claiming a copyright on it is an entirely rea

Re: Preparation of Debian GNU/Linux 3.0r2 (II)

On Nov 24, 2003, at 11:15, GOTO Masanori wrote: So it's hard to make Japanese characters which have beautiful shape and unified baseline because each form is complex, and there are a lot of such complicated characters. Well, at the risk of starting a flame war, that says more about how screwe

Re: Preparation of Debian GNU/Linux 3.0r2 (II)

Hi, On Fri, Nov 21, 2003 at 02:09:15PM +, Andrew Suffield wrote: > On Fri, Nov 21, 2003 at 09:04:32PM +0900, GOTO Masanori wrote: > > At Fri, 21 Nov 2003 08:35:10 +, > > Andrew Suffield wrote: > > > [1 ] > > > On Fri, Nov 21, 2003 at 09:52:01AM +0900, GOTO Masanori wrote: > > > > At Thu,

Re: Preparation of Debian GNU/Linux 3.0r2 (II)

On Fri, Nov 21, 2003 at 09:21:36PM +0100, Osamu Aoki wrote: > On Fri, Nov 21, 2003 at 10:10:51AM +0900, GOTO Masanori wrote: > > At Fri, 21 Nov 2003 09:43:04 +0900, > > Kenshi Muto wrote: > > > > I think if your request was phrased differently, I think the outcome > > > > may have been different. >

Re: Preparation of Debian GNU/Linux 3.0r2 (II)

Hi, On Fri, Nov 21, 2003 at 10:10:51AM +0900, GOTO Masanori wrote: > At Fri, 21 Nov 2003 09:43:04 +0900, > Kenshi Muto wrote: > > > I think if your request was phrased differently, I think the outcome > > > may have been different. > > > > > > What we agreed was HITACHI's claim in current shape c

Re: Preparation of Debian GNU/Linux 3.0r2 (II)

At Fri, 21 Nov 2003 09:43:04 +0900, Kenshi Muto wrote: > At Thu, 20 Nov 2003 22:12:12 +0100, > Osamu Aoki wrote: > > How we treat package with ugly data (both looks and history) is > > different issue. > > I want to focus second issue. For me, what Hitachi talking is not > important. > > This act

Re: Preparation of Debian GNU/Linux 3.0r2 (II)

Don Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sat, 22 Nov 2003, Anthony DeRobertis wrote: >> In the United States, fonts can't be copyrighted. Only "font >> programs" (e.g., the PostScript code used to produce the glyph) can >> be. So there can be no copyright on bitmap fonts, and using a bitmap

Re: Preparation of Debian GNU/Linux 3.0r2 (II)

On Sat, 22 Nov 2003, Anthony DeRobertis wrote: > In the United States, fonts can't be copyrighted. Only "font > programs" (e.g., the PostScript code used to produce the glyph) can > be. So there can be no copyright on bitmap fonts, and using a bitmap > font, a printout, or even tracing over an imag

Re: Preparation of Debian GNU/Linux 3.0r2 (II)

On Fri, 2003-11-21 at 09:09, Andrew Suffield wrote: > > Original author (Hitachi, who were infringed), and kochi upstream > > author (who infringed without knowing) already discussed and their > > conclusion was that it was not just bogus. > > Erm, when asking the question of whether or not they

Re: Preparation of Debian GNU/Linux 3.0r2 (II)

On Thu, 2003-11-20 at 16:36, Osamu Aoki wrote: > HITACHI font is bitmap fonts. Since it is 32 dots fonts which can hold > some aestetic feature of characters, it has uniq shape as a set of > characters. If starts recognizing copyright on bitmap fonts, then we'll have to start removing a fair d

Re: Preparation of Debian GNU/Linux 3.0r2 (II)

At Fri, 21 Nov 2003 09:01:39 -0500, Brian T. Sniffen wrote: > I'm confused -- and don't read Japanese. But let me get one thing > straight: what Hitachi distributed were strictly bitmap fonts, right? > No metafont, truetype, or postscript font outlines, just bitmaps? Well, it's complicated issue.

Re: Preparation of Debian GNU/Linux 3.0r2 (II)

GOTO Masanori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > At Fri, 21 Nov 2003 08:35:10 +, > Andrew Suffield wrote: >> [1 ] >> On Fri, Nov 21, 2003 at 09:52:01AM +0900, GOTO Masanori wrote: >> > At Thu, 20 Nov 2003 22:36:40 +0100, >> > Osamu Aoki wrote: >> > > > > One of "More-clearly-free alternative scala

Re: Preparation of Debian GNU/Linux 3.0r2 (II)

At Sun, 23 Nov 2003 09:58:09 -0500, Brian T. Sniffen wrote: > > GOTO Masanori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > At Fri, 21 Nov 2003 09:01:39 -0500, > > Brian T. Sniffen wrote: > >> I'm confused -- and don't read Japanese. But let me get one thing > >> straight: what Hitachi distributed were stri

Re: Preparation of Debian GNU/Linux 3.0r2 (II)

GOTO Masanori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > At Fri, 21 Nov 2003 09:01:39 -0500, > Brian T. Sniffen wrote: >> I'm confused -- and don't read Japanese. But let me get one thing >> straight: what Hitachi distributed were strictly bitmap fonts, right? >> No metafont, truetype, or postscript font outl

Re: Preparation of Debian GNU/Linux 3.0r2 (II)

On Fri, Nov 21, 2003 at 09:04:32PM +0900, GOTO Masanori wrote: > At Fri, 21 Nov 2003 08:35:10 +, > Andrew Suffield wrote: > > [1 ] > > On Fri, Nov 21, 2003 at 09:52:01AM +0900, GOTO Masanori wrote: > > > At Thu, 20 Nov 2003 22:36:40 +0100, > > > Osamu Aoki wrote: > > > > > > One of "More-clear

Re: Preparation of Debian GNU/Linux 3.0r2 (II)

At Fri, 21 Nov 2003 08:35:10 +, Andrew Suffield wrote: > [1 ] > On Fri, Nov 21, 2003 at 09:52:01AM +0900, GOTO Masanori wrote: > > At Thu, 20 Nov 2003 22:36:40 +0100, > > Osamu Aoki wrote: > > > > > One of "More-clearly-free alternative scalable Japanese fonts" is > > > > > kochi-mincho/kochi-

Re: Preparation of Debian GNU/Linux 3.0r2 (II)

On Fri, Nov 21, 2003 at 09:52:01AM +0900, GOTO Masanori wrote: > At Thu, 20 Nov 2003 22:36:40 +0100, > Osamu Aoki wrote: > > > > One of "More-clearly-free alternative scalable Japanese fonts" is > > > > kochi-mincho/kochi-gothic in sid/sarge. Many Japanese use this > > > > font rather than Watanabe

Re: Preparation of Debian GNU/Linux 3.0r2 (II)

At Fri, 21 Nov 2003 09:43:04 +0900, Kenshi Muto wrote: > > I think if your request was phrased differently, I think the outcome > > may have been different. > > > > What we agreed was HITACHI's claim in current shape can not be the > > reason to remove package. > > > > How we treat package with

Re: Preparation of Debian GNU/Linux 3.0r2 (II)

At Thu, 20 Nov 2003 22:36:40 +0100, Osamu Aoki wrote: > > > One of "More-clearly-free alternative scalable Japanese fonts" is > > > kochi-mincho/kochi-gothic in sid/sarge. Many Japanese use this > > > font rather than Watanabe font. > > > > If this alternative contains the necessary glyphs, then I

Re: Preparation of Debian GNU/Linux 3.0r2 (II)

Thanks Osamu for clearing the issue, At Thu, 20 Nov 2003 22:12:12 +0100, Osamu Aoki wrote: > Muto-san, if what Hitachi said is all what they can for asserting their > "right", it is unconvincing and no one shall feel obligated. I think > Hitachi should find proper communication person who underst

Re: Preparation of Debian GNU/Linux 3.0r2 (II)

On Thu, Nov 20, 2003 at 03:56:47PM +, Henning Makholm wrote: > Scripsit Kenshi Muto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >> If there are more-clearly-free alternative fonts in Debian that > >> provide the same glyphs, then I won't oppose removing them. But if > >> removal would entail actual hardship for >

Re: Preparation of Debian GNU/Linux 3.0r2 (II)

Hi, On Thu, Nov 20, 2003 at 06:47:14PM +0900, Kenshi Muto wrote: > At 20 Nov 03 07:09:51 GMT, > Henning Makholm wrote: > > Scripsit Kenshi Muto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Hmm, "we don't accept what is Hitachi said". This is consensus of us? > > > > What they said certainly wasn't very convincing.

Re: Preparation of Debian GNU/Linux 3.0r2 (II)

On Thu, Nov 20, 2003 at 12:41:13PM +0900, Kenshi Muto wrote: > > > Unless Japanese law is created in a much different manner than it is > > > in the rest of the world, the results of out-of-court settlements do > > > not constitute legal precedents; they may provide insight into the > > > legal co

Re: Preparation of Debian GNU/Linux 3.0r2 (II)

Scripsit Kenshi Muto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> If there are more-clearly-free alternative fonts in Debian that >> provide the same glyphs, then I won't oppose removing them. But if >> removal would entail actual hardship for > "same glyph" of Watanabe-font causes a trouble. It means copy without > o

Re: Preparation of Debian GNU/Linux 3.0r2 (II)

At 20 Nov 03 07:09:51 GMT, Henning Makholm wrote: > Scripsit Kenshi Muto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Hmm, "we don't accept what is Hitachi said". This is consensus of us? > > What they said certainly wasn't very convincing. I see. > > I agree Hitachi make a mess, but it's not reason to kick them. >

Re: Preparation of Debian GNU/Linux 3.0r2 (II)

Scripsit Kenshi Muto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Hmm, "we don't accept what is Hitachi said". This is consensus of us? What they said certainly wasn't very convincing. > I agree Hitachi make a mess, but it's not reason to kick them. It's not so much a question of kicking Hitachi as providing scalable

Re: Preparation of Debian GNU/Linux 3.0r2 (II)

Osamu Aoki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > One question to ask is "is this useful fonts?" If not, we have totally > different ground to remove this package based on uselessness :-) Are there any other good-looking japanese TTF fonts in debian? I ttf-kochi-{gothic,mincho} and I remember every other

Re: Preparation of Debian GNU/Linux 3.0r2 (II)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 At 19 Nov 03 18:12:44 GMT, Osamu Aoki wrote: > On Sun, Nov 16, 2003 at 11:20:21AM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote: I'm sorry but I missed this mail. > > I'm not sure there's any reason to believe that there are licensing > > problems with these fonts. >

Re: Preparation of Debian GNU/Linux 3.0r2 (II)

Hi, On Sun, Nov 16, 2003 at 11:20:21AM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Sun, Nov 16, 2003 at 04:30:26PM +0100, Martin Schulze wrote: > > Kenshi Muto wrote: > > > At Tue, 11 Nov 2003 11:59:24 +0100, > > > Martin Schulze wrote: > > > > Preparation of Debian GNU/Linux 3.0r2 > > > > =

Re: Preparation of Debian GNU/Linux 3.0r2 (II)

On Sun, Nov 16, 2003 at 04:30:26PM +0100, Martin Schulze wrote: > Kenshi Muto wrote: > > At Tue, 11 Nov 2003 11:59:24 +0100, > > Martin Schulze wrote: > > > Preparation of Debian GNU/Linux 3.0r2 > > > = > > > An up-to-date version is at