Re: MPlayer revisited
with a package where upstream are untrustworthy lying bastards. It's sad to see that discussion is returning to those levels, oh well.. -- Dariush Pietrzak, Key fingerprint = 40D0 9FFB 9939 7320 8294 05E0 BCC7 02C4 75CC 50D9 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Does mplayer has PATENT problems that stop it from going into debian?
Hello, Does mplayer has patent problems that stop it from going into debian? -- Dariush Pietrzak, She swore and she cursed, that she never would deceive me Key fingerprint = 40D0 9FFB 9939 7320 8294 05E0 BCC7 02C4 75CC 50D9
Re: new-maintainer vs patents.
I've been asked to provide the list of patents that my package may/may not be possibly infriging on. What package? By whom? Packages are those that I'm going to upload into debian - mplayer and pound. I just thought that it's generic issue - i didn't know that I'm supposed to check patents for my packages and that's why i'm asking for clarification. Who is asking for this? It's not a reasonable request; in fact, it's Well, I've been asked by Front Desk. Since mplayer's copyright issues have been resolved, and the only left issue is that someone mentioned 'possible patent problems', I've been asked to get an 'OK' on patents from debian-legal before we can procede. one that's likely to expose you to greater liability. That's what I thought. -- Dariush Pietrzak, Key fingerprint = 40D0 9FFB 9939 7320 8294 05E0 BCC7 02C4 75CC 50D9
Re: new-maintainer vs patents.
That's not so beyond: you should be shure that the package you are building is compliant to our DFSG and that is not violating any patent or copyright. That mean you should inspect any file in the source. And I should cross-reference every line in the source against every existing patent. Where can I find a list of such patents? Have you got some method of checking which patents are relevant? For example, there exist a patent for 'accessing computers remotely', I can't possibly find relevance by looking at every file in the source, but by looking at bigger picture it's obvious that i am violating such patent by using ssh or telnet or rssh ( and also by using infrared keyboard ). This means that I have to understand every existing patent quite intimately, and also it means that I have to understand every single algorithm used in my package. I won't be able to do that in my lifetime. How did you go about locating patents relevant to your packages? Are there some techniques, automated tools that could make this doable? about locating software patents in every country that uses such patents? Uploading to non-us is not a solution. You should contact and work with the author. Author of patent? -- Dariush Pietrzak, She swore and she cursed, that she never would deceive me Key fingerprint = 40D0 9FFB 9939 7320 8294 05E0 BCC7 02C4 75CC 50D9
Re: new-maintainer vs patents.
What are you trying to do with this mail? haven't you seen the replies from other developers pointing out my errors and misunderstandings? I wrote it before I read them, sorry. Anyhoo, I'm still trying to get a reply to my original mail. -- Dariush Pietrzak, She swore and she cursed, that she never would deceive me Key fingerprint = 40D0 9FFB 9939 7320 8294 05E0 BCC7 02C4 75CC 50D9
new-maintainer vs patents.
Hello, I've been asked to provide the list of patents that my package may/may not be possibly infriging on. As you can imagine this task is way beyond my capabilities, so what should one do with this? Are all package maintainers required to do this? Is there some policy about which patents do we ignore and which do we respect? Would uploading to non-us solve the problem? And if not, how would one go about locating software patents in every country that uses such patents? -- Dariush Pietrzak, She swore and she cursed, that she never would deceive me Key fingerprint = 40D0 9FFB 9939 7320 8294 05E0 BCC7 02C4 75CC 50D9
Mplayer again.
Hello, I was just about to send packages for uploading, when one more issue about mplayer's sources creeped up, one file seems to bee a bit controversial on licence side ( divx_vbr.c, included later in this mail). Since then, I've located way around it: Michael Niedermayer implemented a two-pass mode directly into libavcodec. What are my options now? - can I remove this file in debian-patch? i.e. it would be it .orig.tar.gz, and get removed in diff, or do I need fix upstream first? Also, how problematic is what we have here? /* * divx4_vbr.c * * Copyright (C) Thomas streich - June 2001 * * 2-pass code OpenDivX port: * Copyright (C) 2001 Christoph Lampert [EMAIL PROTECTED] * * This file is part of transcode, a linux video stream * processing tool * * transcode is free software; you can redistribute it and/or * modify * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as * published by * the Free Software Foundation; either version 2, or (at * your option) * any later version. * * transcode is distributed in the hope that it will be * useful, * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied * warranty of * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. * See the * GNU General Public License for more details. * * You should have received a copy of the GNU * General Public License * along with GNU Make; see the file COPYING. If * not, write to * the Free Software Foundation, 675 Mass Ave, * Cambridge, MA 02139, USA. * */ /** *Two-pass-code from OpenDivX ** ** * Large parts of this code were taken from * VbrControl() * * from the OpenDivX project, (C) * divxnetworks, * * this code is published under DivX Open * license, which * * can be found... somewhere... oh, * whatever... * **/ -- Eyck, The Public Ambivalent Individual. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: GNU/Linux taxed in Poland ?! (fwd)
continue to feel that this is in error, please send us a self-addressed stamped envelope and we will send you an official bill for $0 (US). Official bill for $0 will be not accepted in Poland. It must be 0. Exactly THAT was the problem in beforementioned(duh? is there such word anywhere) case. There was 0zl position in their financial books for linux system (red-hat I think) and staroffice suite. And that 0zl position became a problem. On polish isp-* lists this incident was at first ignored, but now it seems that it's getting pretty damn serious. regards, eyck
Re: GNU/Linux taxed in Poland ?! (fwd)
*you do not have to ask or pay for permission*. you don't understand the problem? when we could pay for linux it would cost us less then not paying and paying government taxes for $0 bills. This is not a legal problem to debian nor FSF, but it is a problem because it'll scare people away from debian. My opinion is that it is our problem. of course any advice would be great, what can we do? how can we tell the people that rule our country that great deal with Microsoft that they signed lately that reduces 'TCO by 30%' doesen't make us happy. and that making us pay government for using linux doesen't make us happy either. As for now we are just whining, but as future members of EU .. don't EU regulations regulate such metters? regards, Eyck
