On Thu, Jan 22, 2004 at 09:20:58PM +0100, Alex de Landgraaf wrote:
Hey debian-legal,
Interested in improving font-AAing in Debian, I've taken a look at some of the
patches in Debian for the freetype package. Now patents have hinderd true AA
using freetype in Debian in the past ( 2 years
On Jan 21, 2004, at 21:27, Henning Makholm wrote:
http://homepages.law.asu.edu/~dkarjala/cyberlaw/
PosSoftwareVNewCentury(DBstructures)(NDTex2003).htm
It is not clear to me that this text talks about APIs at all.
It seems to be about the *internal* structure of a database, which -
in my
On Jan 22, 2004, at 13:59, Jakob Bohm wrote:
TINLA, IANAL
Nor am I.
How does this relate to (override, narrow, whatever) the
precedent set by Lotus vs. Borland (the famous case about
Quattro Pro reproducing the Look and Feel of Lotus-1-2-3,
partially because it was also the Lotus-1-2-3
Brian M. Carlson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Debian is not patent-free, and will not be patent-free. CAST5 and
CAST6 are patented but are available for use royalty free. DSA is
patented by, IIRC, David Kravitz of the NSA. Putting a cursor on the
screen using XOR is patented.
The XOR cursor
On Fri, 2004-01-23 at 20:41, Måns Rullgård wrote:
Brian M. Carlson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If Apple decides to actively enforce its patent, you should upgrade
the severity to serious if the license available for general use is
not compatible with the Debian Free Software Guidelines.
Wesley W. Terpstra said:
So, what does that mean for a package where the copyright holder
distributes the package with an extra clause and GPL? Can I
redistribute it at all?
PS. Please CC me on replies as I am not subscribed.
IANAL, IANADD, IJRD-L.
The last time this conversation came up,
On Fri, Jan 23, 2004 at 11:27:20AM -0500, Joe Moore wrote:
Wesley W. Terpstra said:
So, what does that mean for a package where the copyright holder
distributes the package with an extra clause and GPL? Can I
redistribute it at all?
PS. Please CC me on replies as I am not subscribed.
On Fri, 23 Jan 2004, Wesley W. Terpstra wrote:
He includes adns (GPL) in the source tarball; so, that's that.
This means that they themselves are not allowed to distribute the program
too, correct? Since they are violating the terms of adns's copyright?
Yes, that's correct. Presumably
Scripsit Wesley W. Terpstra [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, Jan 23, 2004 at 11:27:20AM -0500, Joe Moore wrote:
If the package contains GPL'd code that is written by someone
other than the main copyright holder (Adtran), then the package
is undistributable.
He includes adns (GPL) in the source
Wesley W. Terpstra [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I have a package which has in the COPYING file this text:
Cheops is distributed under the terms of the GNU General Public License.
In addition, Adtran's name MAY NOT be removed from the product (or any
derivative work) and must be prominantly
On Fri, Jan 23, 2004 at 07:43:44PM +0100, Wesley W. Terpstra wrote:
He includes adns (GPL) in the source tarball; so, that's that.
This means that they themselves are not allowed to distribute the program
too, correct? Since they are violating the terms of adns's copyright?
If it's a
On Fri, Jan 23, 2004 at 08:08:03AM +, Brian M. Carlson wrote:
patch (030-bytecode-interpreter.diff), I suspect this patch still remains
from
the 1.0 freetype series, when this and other patches were used to supply an
unpatented bytecode interpreter. According to the freetype site,
On Fri, 2004-01-23 at 23:12, Anthony Fok wrote:
I just did some experiments, and it seems that the prettier version
(http://descent.netsplit.com/~scott/fonts-upstream.png) was rendered with
FreeType's autohinting on. In that case, I suggest modifying
/etc/fonts/local.conf and uncomment the
I've put up a web page listing possible replacements for packages currently in
non-free. There are still lot of blanks - please give suggestions. Perhaps this
page can help in the discussion about removing non-free.
Also included is explanation why the package is in non-free. This is based
on the
On Sat, Jan 24, 2004 at 02:29:39AM +0200, Niklas Vainio wrote:
I've put up a web page listing possible replacements for packages currently in
non-free. There are still lot of blanks - please give suggestions. Perhaps
this
page can help in the discussion about removing non-free.
Also
Le sam 24/01/2004 à 00:12, Anthony Fok a écrit :
I just did some experiments, and it seems that the prettier version
(http://descent.netsplit.com/~scott/fonts-upstream.png) was rendered with
FreeType's autohinting on.
Yes, enabling the autohinter disables the bytecode interpreter as the
two
On Sat, Jan 24, 2004 at 02:29:39AM +0200, Niklas Vainio wrote:
I've put up a web page listing possible replacements for packages currently in
non-free. There are still lot of blanks - please give suggestions. Perhaps
this
page can help in the discussion about removing non-free.
Also
17 matches
Mail list logo
