Re: Petition for a Flash plugin for Linux on PPC

2003-04-24 Thread Brett Carter
> You can always educate them, but you can neither tell how many times > it will take them for being educated nor whether they will accept > to change their tools. The only sure things in life are death and taxes. :) > You cannot modify properly PDF or html. You cannot format properly > text fil

Re: Petition for a Flash plugin for Linux on PPC

2003-04-23 Thread Jérôme Marant
En réponse à Brett Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Hey, the World is not as simple as the way you seems to describe it. > > You can individualy refuse proprietary software, at home that is. > > At work, it's quite different (yes, using free software at work is > > possible). What if some customers

Re: Petition for a Flash plugin for Linux on PPC

2003-04-22 Thread Brett Carter
> Hey, the World is not as simple as the way you seems to describe it. > You can individualy refuse proprietary software, at home that is. > At work, it's quite different (yes, using free software at work is > possible). What if some customers only speak MS Word? Will you piss > them off, or will y

Re: Petition for a Flash plugin for Linux on PPC

2003-04-19 Thread Michael Shields
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Alessandro Selli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Pursuant to the terms and conditions of this License, you are granted a > nonexclusive license to use the Specification for the sole purposes of > developing Products that output SWF. Is this believed to be enforceable i

Re: Petition for a Flash plugin for Linux on PPC

2003-04-18 Thread Jérôme Marant
Brett Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Yeah really. I always considered the absence of a flash and real player for > linux ppc a blessing not a curse. Why perpetuate proprietary data formats? > I don't use it, and I don't go to sites that use it and don't provide an > alternative. I suggest

Re: Petition for a Flash plugin for Linux on PPC

2003-04-18 Thread Jérôme Marant
christophe barbe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Anyway for me the conclusion is that flash must be ignored and that I > don't need a plugin for it. Err, my approach is quite different: non-free software must be ignored. I won't read flash if I need non-free software to read it. I'm perfectly OK w

Re: Petition for a Flash plugin for Linux on PPC

2003-04-18 Thread christophe barbe
On Fri, Apr 18, 2003 at 06:09:59PM +0200, Alessandro Selli wrote: > |Outputing to the screen ? > | > > According to the licence: > > 1. > > Definitions > > c Flash File Format (SWF) or SWF means the file format designated by .SWF Have you already discussed this with the team behind http:

Re: Petition for a Flash plugin for Linux on PPC

2003-04-18 Thread Brett Carter
> My understanding is that the Flash file format if documented. > If this is true, this is a very good thing from Macromedia and I would > prefer to encourage people to work on a Free player implementation (see > apt-cache show swf-player) that would work on all architectures (not > only ppc). >

Re: Petition for a Flash plugin for Linux on PPC

2003-04-18 Thread Alessandro Selli
Il giorno Fri, 18 Apr 2003, christophe barbe così ha scritto: |From: christophe barbe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> |To: Debian PowerPC |Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 11:39:52 -0400 |Subject: Re: Petition for a Flash plugin for Linux on PPC | |On Fri, Apr 18, 2003 at 05:00:04PM +0200, Alessandro Selli

Re: Petition for a Flash plugin for Linux on PPC

2003-04-18 Thread christophe barbe
On Fri, Apr 18, 2003 at 05:00:04PM +0200, Alessandro Selli wrote: > Pursuant to the terms and conditions of this License, you are granted a > nonexclusive license to use the Specification for the sole purposes of > developing Products that output SWF. Outputing to the screen ? -- Christophe Barb

Re: Petition for a Flash plugin for Linux on PPC

2003-04-18 Thread Jérôme Marant
En réponse à Alessandro Selli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > http://www.macromedia.com/software/flash/open/licensing/fileformat/license2.html > > MACROMEDIA, INC > > Macromedia Flash File Format (SWF) Specification License Agreement > > [...] > > 2.Licenses > Pursuant to the terms and conditions o

Re: Petition for a Flash plugin for Linux on PPC

2003-04-18 Thread Alessandro Selli
Il giorno Fri, 18 Apr 2003, christophe barbe così ha scritto: |From: christophe barbe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> |To: Debian PowerPC |Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 09:17:30 -0400 |Subject: Re: Petition for a Flash plugin for Linux on PPC | |On Fri, Apr 18, 2003 at 02:56:52PM +0200, Alessandro Selli

Re: Petition for a Flash plugin for Linux on PPC

2003-04-18 Thread Vincent Bernat
OoO En ce début d'après-midi nuageux du vendredi 18 avril 2003, vers 14:56, Alessandro Selli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> disait: > Macromedia's licence does not allow people to produce their own flash > players. They can only develop software to produce flash files. Which licenses ? -- Make sure spec

Re: Petition for a Flash plugin for Linux on PPC

2003-04-18 Thread christophe barbe
On Fri, Apr 18, 2003 at 02:56:52PM +0200, Alessandro Selli wrote: > Macromedia's licence does not allow people to produce their own flash > players. They can only develop software to produce flash files. Sure? The site http://www.openswf.org/ which seems to be the reference seems to indicate th

Re: Petition for a Flash plugin for Linux on PPC

2003-04-18 Thread christophe barbe
On Thu, Apr 17, 2003 at 11:19:07PM -0300, Rog?rio Brito wrote: > Perhaps others may not know of a petition for Macromedia to > release a flash plugin for Linux on PPC, but still be > interested in it. My understanding is that the Flash file format if documented. If this is true,

Petition for a Flash plugin for Linux on PPC

2003-04-17 Thread Rogério Brito
Hi there, people. Perhaps others may not know of a petition for Macromedia to release a flash plugin for Linux on PPC, but still be interested in it. The petition is at and currently lists more than 640 request