On Tue, Jul 11, 2000 at 09:36:10PM +, Jakub Lida wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>
>
> According to the Debian Developer's Reference, Section 2.1, i.e. the
> standard procedure to become a Debian package maintainer, I would like
> to announce my willingness to build and therefore
I found that > 60 packages in Debian have .gifs included.
I will probably fill wishlist bugs against them all unless
someone oppose this.
Is it legal at all to distribute GPL'ed .gifs at all ?
[...]
Finally, any free program is threatened constantly by software
patents. We wish to avoid the d
Tomasz Wegrzanowski wrote:
> I found that > 60 packages in Debian have .gifs included.
>
> I will probably fill wishlist bugs against them all unless
> someone oppose this.
>
> Is it legal at all to distribute GPL'ed .gifs at all ?
It's my understanding that the lzw compression usually used in
On Wed, Jul 12, 2000 at 03:47:29PM -0400, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
>
> Tomasz Wegrzanowski wrote:
>
> > I found that > 60 packages in Debian have .gifs included.
> >
> > I will probably fill wishlist bugs against them all unless
> > someone oppose this.
> >
> > Is it legal at all to distribute
Tomasz Wegrzanowski wrote:
>> I found that > 60 packages in Debian have .gifs included.
> Doh !, not uncompressed pseudo-gifs.
> I was asking if GPLed LZW gifs are legal at all ?
I don't think the GIFs themselves infringe on the patent, as they do not
encode or decode any data. The patent is for
Note: I was just simply responding to your equivalence of the indemnity
clause cited below (note at the time of my response all I was going on was
the snippet quoted by Henning) with a "no warranty" clause. Digging the
license out, it seems there already is a pretty clear "no warranty" clause
s
On Wed, Jul 12, 2000 at 01:39:55PM -0700, Mark Rafn wrote:
> I don't think the GIFs themselves infringe on the patent, as they do not
> encode or decode any data. The patent is for a process (as are all
> patents, if I understand correctly), not the resulting object.
>
> If the GIFs were created
On Wed, Jul 12, 2000 at 05:48:33PM -0700, Joseph Carter wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 12, 2000 at 01:39:55PM -0700, Mark Rafn wrote:
> > I don't think the GIFs themselves infringe on the patent, as they do not
> > encode or decode any data. The patent is for a process (as are all
> > patents, if I understa
On Thu, Jul 13, 2000 at 03:48:56AM +0200, Tomasz Wegrzanowski wrote:
> > > If the GIFs were created with unlicensed tools, then the author of the
> > > images might be in violation. If they are viewed with unlicensed tools,
> > > then the viewer might be in violation. The author/distributor of su
On Thu, Jul 13, 2000 at 03:48:56AM +0200, Tomasz Wegrzanowski wrote:
> GPL requires people to whom you redistribute a file
> to be able to modify and redistribute it.
> But they can't modify .gifs they got, because of
> patent problems.
> GPL says. that if, due to patent problems, you
> can't meet
On Wed, Jul 12, 2000 at 08:10:41PM -0700, Joseph Carter wrote:
> Modifying a GIF involves decompressing it into a pixmap, changing the
> pixmap, and writing over the GIF with a new one. Provided you do not LZW
> compress the new one, you're okay. Unless of course the program cannot
> read a non-L
On Wed, Jul 12, 2000 at 10:13:56PM -0500, David Starner wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 13, 2000 at 03:48:56AM +0200, Tomasz Wegrzanowski wrote:
> > GPL requires people to whom you redistribute a file
> > to be able to modify and redistribute it.
> > But they can't modify .gifs they got, because of
> > patent
On Thu, Jul 13, 2000 at 05:30:00AM +0200, Tomasz Wegrzanowski wrote:
> This plainly states that if recipient can't modify .gif in every
> way he/she want, you can't distribute GPLed file to him/her.
Can you modify gcc to RSA encrypt all its output and distribute it? No,
not legally in the US. So i
On Thu, Jul 13, 2000 at 05:19:51AM +0200, Tomasz Wegrzanowski wrote:
> > > GPL requires people to whom you redistribute a file
> > > to be able to modify and redistribute it.
> > > But they can't modify .gifs they got, because of
> > > patent problems.
> >
> > But you CAN modify GIFs, you just can
I found that > 60 packages in Debian have .gifs included.
I will probably fill wishlist bugs against them all unless
someone oppose this.
Is it legal at all to distribute GPL'ed .gifs at all ?
[...]
Finally, any free program is threatened constantly by software
patents. We wish to avoid the
Tomasz Wegrzanowski wrote:
> I found that > 60 packages in Debian have .gifs included.
>
> I will probably fill wishlist bugs against them all unless
> someone oppose this.
>
> Is it legal at all to distribute GPL'ed .gifs at all ?
It's my understanding that the lzw compression usually used i
On Wed, Jul 12, 2000 at 03:47:29PM -0400, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
>
> Tomasz Wegrzanowski wrote:
>
> > I found that > 60 packages in Debian have .gifs included.
> >
> > I will probably fill wishlist bugs against them all unless
> > someone oppose this.
> >
> > Is it legal at all to distribute
Tomasz Wegrzanowski wrote:
>> I found that > 60 packages in Debian have .gifs included.
> Doh !, not uncompressed pseudo-gifs.
> I was asking if GPLed LZW gifs are legal at all ?
I don't think the GIFs themselves infringe on the patent, as they do not
encode or decode any data. The patent is for
Note: I was just simply responding to your equivalence of the indemnity
clause cited below (note at the time of my response all I was going on was
the snippet quoted by Henning) with a "no warranty" clause. Digging the
license out, it seems there already is a pretty clear "no warranty" clause
On Wed, Jul 12, 2000 at 01:39:55PM -0700, Mark Rafn wrote:
> I don't think the GIFs themselves infringe on the patent, as they do not
> encode or decode any data. The patent is for a process (as are all
> patents, if I understand correctly), not the resulting object.
>
> If the GIFs were created
On Wed, Jul 12, 2000 at 05:48:33PM -0700, Joseph Carter wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 12, 2000 at 01:39:55PM -0700, Mark Rafn wrote:
> > I don't think the GIFs themselves infringe on the patent, as they do not
> > encode or decode any data. The patent is for a process (as are all
> > patents, if I underst
On Thu, Jul 13, 2000 at 03:48:56AM +0200, Tomasz Wegrzanowski wrote:
> > > If the GIFs were created with unlicensed tools, then the author of the
> > > images might be in violation. If they are viewed with unlicensed tools,
> > > then the viewer might be in violation. The author/distributor of s
On Thu, Jul 13, 2000 at 03:48:56AM +0200, Tomasz Wegrzanowski wrote:
> GPL requires people to whom you redistribute a file
> to be able to modify and redistribute it.
> But they can't modify .gifs they got, because of
> patent problems.
> GPL says. that if, due to patent problems, you
> can't meet
On Wed, Jul 12, 2000 at 08:10:41PM -0700, Joseph Carter wrote:
> Modifying a GIF involves decompressing it into a pixmap, changing the
> pixmap, and writing over the GIF with a new one. Provided you do not LZW
> compress the new one, you're okay. Unless of course the program cannot
> read a non-
On Wed, Jul 12, 2000 at 10:13:56PM -0500, David Starner wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 13, 2000 at 03:48:56AM +0200, Tomasz Wegrzanowski wrote:
> > GPL requires people to whom you redistribute a file
> > to be able to modify and redistribute it.
> > But they can't modify .gifs they got, because of
> > paten
On Thu, Jul 13, 2000 at 05:30:00AM +0200, Tomasz Wegrzanowski wrote:
> This plainly states that if recipient can't modify .gif in every
> way he/she want, you can't distribute GPLed file to him/her.
Can you modify gcc to RSA encrypt all its output and distribute it? No,
not legally in the US. So
On Thu, Jul 13, 2000 at 05:19:51AM +0200, Tomasz Wegrzanowski wrote:
> > > GPL requires people to whom you redistribute a file
> > > to be able to modify and redistribute it.
> > > But they can't modify .gifs they got, because of
> > > patent problems.
> >
> > But you CAN modify GIFs, you just ca
On Tue, Jul 11, 2000 at 09:36:10PM +, Jakub Lida wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>
>
> According to the Debian Developer's Reference, Section 2.1, i.e. the
> standard procedure to become a Debian package maintainer, I would like
> to announce my willingness to build and therefore
28 matches
Mail list logo
