Since I've no response of ftp team, I plan to close this bug soon if nobody
has new arguments against this.
--
Florent
pgpFCZpXRpclM.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Le Vendredi 12 Août 2005 07:21, Steve Langasek a écrit :
On Thu, Aug 11, 2005 at 03:24:45PM +0200, Florent Bayle wrote:
Le Samedi 6 Août 2005 06:40, Steve Langasek a écrit :
Hi Florent,
On Wed, Jun 22, 2005 at 06:28:54AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Wed, Jun 22, 2005 at
Le Samedi 6 Août 2005 06:40, Steve Langasek a écrit :
Hi Florent,
Hi Steve,
[...]
Well, if the prior art exists which shows the patent is invalid, I'm
personally satisfied that we can ship it, but this is actually the
purview of the ftp team to decide.
Is this bug still being held open
On Thu, Aug 11, 2005 at 03:24:45PM +0200, Florent Bayle wrote:
Le Samedi 6 Août 2005 06:40, Steve Langasek a écrit :
[...]
Well, if the prior art exists which shows the patent is invalid, I'm
personally satisfied that we can ship it, but this is actually the
purview of the ftp team to
Hi Florent,
On Wed, Jun 22, 2005 at 06:28:54AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Wed, Jun 22, 2005 at 03:25:22AM +0200, Florent Bayle wrote:
Le Mercredi 22 Juin 2005 02:38, Steve Langasek a écrit :
[...]
You should not remove wontfix tag, it's maintainer role to decide if he
will fix
On Wed, Jun 22, 2005 at 03:25:22AM +0200, Florent Bayle wrote:
Le Mercredi 22 Juin 2005 02:38, Steve Langasek a écrit :
[...]
You should not remove wontfix tag, it's maintainer role to decide if he
will fix the bug or not.
The wontfix tag isn't really appropriate for an RC bug, however
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
severity 309257 grave
Bug#309257: libpano12: patent problems
Severity set to `grave'.
tags 309257 - wontfix
Bug#309257: libpano12: patent problems
Tags were: wontfix
Tags removed: wontfix
tags 309257 + sid etch
Bug#309257: libpano12: patent problems
Le Mardi 21 Juin 2005 18:10, Robert Jordens a écrit :
severity 309257 grave
tags 309257 - wontfix
tags 309257 + sid etch
thanks
You should not remove wontfix tag, it's maintainer role to decide if he will
fix the bug or not.
Hey!
* Florent Bayle:
severity 309257 important
tags
On Tue, Jun 21, 2005 at 08:03:48PM +0200, Florent Bayle wrote:
Le Mardi 21 Juin 2005 18:10, Robert Jordens a écrit :
severity 309257 grave
tags 309257 - wontfix
tags 309257 + sid etch
thanks
You should not remove wontfix tag, it's maintainer role to decide if he will
fix the bug or
Le Mercredi 22 Juin 2005 02:38, Steve Langasek a écrit :
[...]
You should not remove wontfix tag, it's maintainer role to decide if he
will fix the bug or not.
The wontfix tag isn't really appropriate for an RC bug, however -- either
it gets fixed, or the package gets removed.
Yes, but I
The senior patent holder is presumably now Ford Oxaal, who discusses
his licensing policy, his relationship to iPIX, and the status of
Helmut Dersch's PT toolset at
http://www.pictosphere.com/kwx/faq.html .
I have made no attempt to evaluate the strength of his patents in
light of the prior art,
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
severity 309257 important
Bug#309257: libpano12: patent problems
Severity set to `important'.
stop
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
tags 309257 wontfix
Bug#309257: libpano12: patent problems
There were no tags set.
Tags added: wontfix
quit
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs
Read more about the iPIX vs Dersch from FFII at
http://swpat.ffii.org/pikta/xrani/ipix/
The second link (contains patent titles) suggests that there
is clear prior art.
Interactive Pictures appear to be a tn.us corporation - does anyone
nearby know whether any regulations forbid so-called patent
Hello!
[Mon, 16 May 2005] MJ Ray wrote:
Read more about the iPIX vs Dersch from FFII at
http://swpat.ffii.org/pikta/xrani/ipix/
The second link (contains patent titles) suggests that there
is clear prior art.
Thanks for the link!
The prior art argument is pretty much irrelevant in our
Le lundi 16 mai 2005 à 12:12 +0200, Robert Jordens a écrit :
For a user or for Debian we can't knowingly risk lawsuits even if we
think they can be won.
So what? Are we going to remove any piece of software for which a
jackass claims he has some prior art?
Come on, please resurrect the non-us
Le lundi 16 mai 2005 à 20:33 +0200, Josselin Mouette a écrit :
So what? Are we going to remove any piece of software for which a
jackass claims he has some prior art?
I meant some patent, of course.
--
.''`. Josselin Mouette/\./\
: :' : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
`. `'
Package: libpano12
Version: 2.7.0.9-1
Severity: serious
As has been pointed out multiple times in the ITP (obviously noone read
it...) for panotools
(http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=251617), the original
author of panotools/libpano, Helmut Dersch has been forced by patent
18 matches
Mail list logo
