On Sun, 4 Feb 2001, Samuel W. Heywood wrote:
> On Sun, 4 Feb 2001 15:11:14 -0500 (EST), Steve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > but png is philosophically more acceptable to
> > me because anyone at all may create a png graphic, while gifs are
> > only legally able to be created by license.
>
> I also have heard that gifs may be created legally only by license.
> If that were so, then why are there so many publicly available freeware
> programs out there that are capable of producing gifs?
First of all, the logic of that question is kind of like,
"If a 55mph speed limit exists, then why are so many people driving
faster than that?" ;-)
Aside from that though...
Compuserve allowed gifs to be used for a long time without
requiring registration or license fees. This isn't the same thing
as "without license" or "free." IE requires no fees, but every time
you install it, you must agree to the license provisions.
The situation now, as I understand it, is that any program which
incorporated gif while the format was allowed to be used at no cost
is grandfathered-in to the provisions extant at that time.
AFAIK, It's only new programs wishing to include gif capability
which must now pay the licensing fee... and I imagine also old
programs wishing to upgrade.
- Steve
