On 7/18/05, Ryan Schultz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Monday 18 July 2005 11:12 pm, you wrote:
> > >FWIW, I would not touch SNEeSe or any fragment derived from it with a
> > >ten-foot pole unless they can tell you where sneese.dat came from and
> > >what's in it.
> >
> > Well file(1) said it is
Arnaud Engelfriet wrote:
>Here's a claim that would _not_ be maths as such under European law:
>"A method of encrypting a bitstream A using a key B that is the
>same length as A, comprising computing A XOR B".
That *is* math. If a judge has ruled that it isn't, he doesn't know what the
hell he's
Arnoud Engelfriet wrote:
>I agree with you that the distinction may seem artificial. But it
>does seem logical to me to say "you can't patent A XOR B but you can
>patent a computer program that does that."
If you can patent the class of computer programs which do A XOR B,
you have patented the abst
Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> Arnoud Engelfriet wrote:
> >Then the formula remains
> >public domain; you just can't make, use or sell a program that
> >implements the formula. Were the formula patented, then you couldn't
> >even publish a textbook.
> Unfortunately, that's a distinction without a diffe
On Tuesday 19 July 2005 03:27 am, Michael K. Edwards wrote:
> On 7/18/05, Ryan Schultz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Monday 18 July 2005 11:12 pm, you wrote:
> > > >FWIW, I would not touch SNEeSe or any fragment derived from it with a
> > > >ten-foot pole unless they can tell you where sneese.d
Hello,
I am the new maintainer of GFingerPoken, and have had a discussion with the
upstream author. I would like to have your opinion about this.
Some background about all this:
First of all, GFingerPoken is released under the GPL.
GFingerPoken uses xpms for the graphics. Those files are inclu
There's two main issues here.
1) Does everything in main have to include the preferred form of
modification?
I don't believe so, and it's trivial to demonstrate that this isn't the
current situation (see the nv driver in the X.org source tree, for
instance). The DFSG require the availability of s
On 7/18/05, Michael K. Edwards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 7/18/05, Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 7/18/05, Michael K. Edwards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On 7/18/05, Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > Are you suggesting that the use of time -> frequency domain m
Hi Raul,
> "avoiding distribution of software to avoid potential
> but as yet non-existent challenges"
To describe patent lawsuits as a non-existent challenge seems a little
optimistic to me. If it were so, there would have been no point to
the recent campaign in Europe.
Basing estimates of w
On 7/19/05, Nathanael Nerode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Arnaud Engelfriet wrote:
> >Here's a claim that would _not_ be maths as such under European law:
> >"A method of encrypting a bitstream A using a key B that is the
> >same length as A, comprising computing A XOR B".
>
> That *is* math. If
On 7/19/05, Daniel James <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Raul,
>
> > "avoiding distribution of software to avoid potential
> > but as yet non-existent challenges"
>
> To describe patent lawsuits as a non-existent challenge seems a little
> optimistic to me. If it were so, there would have been no
On 7/19/05, Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 7/18/05, Michael K. Edwards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > If the question is, "is it remotely plausible that Fraunhofer claims
> > to have patented the Discrete Cosine Transform or its application to
> > music compression", the answer is "no"
On 7/19/05, Michael K. Edwards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think you're missing Arnoud's point. It's not math, it's an
> application of math to the problem domain of message encryption. That
> makes it statutory subject matter for patenting, which math as such is
> not.
"it" is rather unclear
On 7/19/05, Nathanael Nerode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Arnoud Engelfriet wrote:
> >I agree with you that the distinction may seem artificial. But it
> >does seem logical to me to say "you can't patent A XOR B but you can
> >patent a computer program that does that."
> If you can patent the class
On 7/19/05, Arnoud Engelfriet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> > Unfortunately, that's a distinction without a difference. If you're
> > prohibited from making a computer program implementing the algorithm, you're
> > prohibited from writing a formal description of the algori
On 7/19/05, Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 7/19/05, Michael K. Edwards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I think you're missing Arnoud's point. It's not math, it's an
> > application of math to the problem domain of message encryption. That
> > makes it statutory subject matter for pate
On 7/19/05, Matthew Garrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[an assessment with which I agree almost 100%]
The game "GFingerPoken" (which I have played and really quite enjoy)
is definitely a "derivative work" of its artwork. It's a complex work
that integrally incorporates substantial portions of a p
On Sat, Jul 16, 2005 at 12:54:04AM -0700, Michael K. Edwards wrote:
> I wrote:
> > Presumably you are also aware of patents 5,341,457 and 5,627,938,
> > which Lucent has been seeking to enforce against Dolby AC-3. As your
> > encoder appears to use Ehmer's tone masking techniques, which are als
On 7/19/05, Michael K. Edwards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> OK -- how about this: Fraunhofer, AFAICT, has not attempted to patent
> any well-known technique of converting data from a time series to a
> frequency spectrum, nor the idea of applying such a technique to music
> compression, nor would
On 7/19/05, Monty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ehmer's work is cited but we don't actually use Ehmer's data. The
> curves you see in the tonemasking are directly from the ears of yours
> truly measured repeatedly over the space of a month and pessimistic
> mean taken. There's a 4kHz notch there t
On Tue, 19 Jul 2005 15:10:10 +0200 Arnoud Engelfriet wrote:
> More like, the expression in .obj is patented, but the expression
> in .PDF is not. Feel free to publish papers; don't distribute
> devices that execute the algorithm disclosed in those papers.
And how is literate programming dealt wit
On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 22:08:55 -0400 Joe Smith wrote:
[...]
> 3. Requireng the changes to be noted in-file is problematic.The rest
> is even more problematic seeming.
> Requiring naming changes may not be DFSG-Free. The clause in the
> guidelines seems to refer to
> package names, not executable n
On Tue, 19 Jul 2005 16:13:43 +0100 Matthew Garrett wrote:
> There's two main issues here.
>
> 1) Does everything in main have to include the preferred form of
> modification?
IMHO, yes, as this is the widely accepted definition of "source code"
(it is found in the GPL text, as you know) and DFSG
On Tue, 19 Jul 2005 16:52:23 +0200 Bas Wijnen wrote:
> Hello,
Hi! :)
[...]
> Some background about all this:
> First of all, GFingerPoken is released under the GPL.
[...]
> However, when I found that (some of) the graphics had a source from
> which they could be compiled, I concluded two things
Francesco Poli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Jul 2005 16:13:43 +0100 Matthew Garrett wrote:
>> 1) Does everything in main have to include the preferred form of
>> modification?
>
> IMHO, yes, as this is the widely accepted definition of "source code"
> (it is found in the GPL text, as yo
I wrote:
> I am not "pro-software-patent". I think that the USPTO (and, from the
> look of it, the EPO) are doing a profoundly incompetent job of
> filtering out the trivial and the erroneous from _all_ kinds of patent
> applications, not just those which permit an implementation in terms
> of a V
I wrote, with regard to aspersions cast by Nathanael on the competence
and consistency of judicial opinions in intellectual property arenas:
> I am glad that I do not live in the dystopic fantasy world you
> describe, with incompetent judges obsessed by sophomoric deductions
> from Plato and easil
On Tue, Jul 19, 2005 at 04:05:59PM -0700, Michael K. Edwards wrote:
> That's mighty cool. Can you say anything about the Mercora encoder's
> psycho-acoustic bits
In fact, I can't say much about it (I know all about it but am under
NDA).
> or about how you approach the risk that loading
> a pa
On Tue, Jul 19, 2005 at 04:52:23PM +0200, Bas Wijnen wrote:
> First of all, GFingerPoken is released under the GPL.
>
> GFingerPoken uses xpms for the graphics. Those files are included in the
> distribution as .h files, and included directly into the source. Some of
> them, however, were genera
29 matches
Mail list logo
