>   However, I seem also to recall that some of the pattern files
>in 0.56 were, um, questionably appropriated from other sources (including
>Adobe).  I think the long and the short is that we don't really know where
>they came from or who (if anyone) holds a copyright interest in them.

Should they really be distributed along with GIMP then? This could be a 
horrible disservice to someone creating art using GIMP and later finding 
out that his works contain copyrighted material owned by someone else.


Alexander Maryanovsky.

At 15:07 7/21/2002 -0500, Kelly Martin wrote:
> > <http://cvs.gnome.org> seems to imply that somebody called sopwith
> > has uploaded these two files to the CVS-tree gimp-data-min.
> >
> > However, sopwith appears all over these directories, both for changes
> > made by <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and by
> > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.
>
>"sopwith" (Elliot Lee) made the original checkin of the current CVS tree, so
>a Really Old file checked in by sopwith probably means a file introduced to
>the GIMP prior to whenever the prior CVS repository went byebye (1998
>sometime, I think).  I think, but am not entirely sure, that the two
>patterns being referenced were part of 0.56, which would mean they trace
>back to S&P.  However, I seem also to recall that some of the pattern files
>in 0.56 were, um, questionably appropriated from other sources (including
>Adobe).  I think the long and the short is that we don't really know where
>they came from or who (if anyone) holds a copyright interest in them.
>
>Kelly

_______________________________________________
Gimp-developer mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer

Reply via email to