[hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions
Bottom line is that SIFT is not patented except in the USA. Only those in the USA that use hugin for commercial products need permission from the UBC. As Bruno mentioned, users are warned about this during use, but also in documentation accompanying the download. They can either obtain that permission themselves or (if on windows) decide to download the version of hugin without SIFT, readily available on SourceForge. SURF is patented worldwide, which is one of the reasons no control point generator using SURF is included in hugin downloads for Windows. Allard On Dec 25 2009, 3:00 pm, DaveN wrote: > Bottom line is that you click on a hugin download link and you get > autopano sift in the download. Saying a disk image isn't really a > package ring as being believable. > > On Dec 25, 12:58 pm, Harry van der Wolf wrote: > > > 2009/12/25 DaveN > > > > > Could you be more specific? Which hugin download includes > > > autopano-sift-C? > > > > Getting source and compile yourself is not the same as download. > > > > The Mac downloads include it in the compiled version downloads (tested > > > 0.8.0 and 2009.4.0). I have not tested the Windows precompiled > > > versions. > > > > Here is a link to the 2009.4.0 download: > > > >http://sourceforge.net/projects/hugin/files/hugin/hugin-2009.4/hugin-... > > > As mentioned by me about 30 mails ago in this same thread: > > > *Just for complete reference to both Mac and non-Mac users: > > The 2009.2 was the first to include the AutoCP generators but NOT inside > > Hugin. They are delivered with the package as separate packages. > > Technically speaking: the MacOSX .dmg that is downloaded is NOT a package, > > but the official MacOSX disk image format, like .iso or .nrg or whatever > > other formats exist. Like any CD distributed with many magazines containing > > lots and lots of software. That's not different. > > Did you write to all those magazines as well? > > > When installing AutoCP generators on MacOSX, they are still NOT inside the > > Hugin packages but installed elsewhere. > > The separate packes are in a separate Folder "on the CD" and come with a > > Readme when and where you can use them. > > Inside the packages you will find again the Readme.* > > > Harry -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx
Re: [hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions
2009/12/26 DaveN > Bottom line is that you click on a hugin download link and you get > autopano sift in the download. Saying a disk image isn't really a > package ring as being believable. > > A disk image is definitely different even though you feel it is the same. And the Hugin for OSX "CD" is no more or less than a CD. The physical form is not important (like downloading the ubuntu or Fedora disk or getting it via snail-mail or in a shop). "Hugin for OSX" is a CD and can only be downloaded. It needs to be mounted as a disk (even though you only have to double-click it), exactly like the disk you get sometimes from magazines. Hugin for OSX does NOT come as an installer, package or archive. You get a "CD" with hugin on it and other tools, nicely separated but on one and the same (read-only) disk. You mount the "CD" and NOTHING happens. No installer, no autostarter: nothing. You manually copy the Hugin.app to it's location (as is with 90% of OSX applications in contrast with e.g. windows). On the "CD" you will find a folder containing licenses, on the "CD" you will find a folder "autoCP generators" containing a(nother) readme and two small "CD images": one containing panomatic, one containing autopano-sift-c. When opening the small "CD" containing the AutoCP generator, you will find again another readme, again a license file and off course the generator/detector and an installer. This is definitely totally different from a package or installer, no matter what your gut feeling tells you or whether you can download it or buy a "freeware/shareware" CD/DVD via a magazine, or an online webshop or a local shop giving you a shiny disk in a luxury box. A french magazine delivering a DVD with their magazine containing all kind of imaging and video tools (a.o. ptgui, ptmac, hugin and (autocp) tools, imagefuser (sounds interesting :-) )) and for example unrestricted full functional other tools with "30 day trial, stop using it or buy a license", is the same. The magazine is not responsible if the user uses the software longer than 30 days without paying or if the user uses it against the licenses provided with the software. (And the Hugin "CD" comes with the licenses: twice!) A user in the USA is warned 3 times and has the license 2 times available. If he/she still decides to use it, then this user is practicing illegal actions not the creator of the "CD". One thing that is also constantly mixed up in this discussion: patent legislation, copyright legislation and licence legislation and finally "normal" legislation w.r.t. end user responsibility. Next to that: all licenses claim the usage of the software AND the legislation in the country you are using it. Using e.g. the OpenSource tool OpenOffice in North-Korea, as commercial journalist or non-commercial student, to write an article against the regime is still illegal in North-Korea even though it is not in the rest of the world. Almost finally: the total population of the US is only 4% of the total world population, be it one of the more technically advanced 4%. The commercial photographers are even a much smaller amount of that 4% (and they should be aware). It also irritates me as a European that (some parts of) this 4% think they can force their standard to the other 96%, or think that they are the standard everything else should be aligned against. Especially when the distributed form is correct. Harry -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx
[hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions
Bottom line is that you click on a hugin download link and you get autopano sift in the download. Saying a disk image isn't really a package ring as being believable. On Dec 25, 12:58 pm, Harry van der Wolf wrote: > 2009/12/25 DaveN > > > > Could you be more specific? Which hugin download includes > > autopano-sift-C? > > > Getting source and compile yourself is not the same as download. > > > The Mac downloads include it in the compiled version downloads (tested > > 0.8.0 and 2009.4.0). I have not tested the Windows precompiled > > versions. > > > Here is a link to the 2009.4.0 download: > > >http://sourceforge.net/projects/hugin/files/hugin/hugin-2009.4/hugin-... > > As mentioned by me about 30 mails ago in this same thread: > > *Just for complete reference to both Mac and non-Mac users: > The 2009.2 was the first to include the AutoCP generators but NOT inside > Hugin. They are delivered with the package as separate packages. > Technically speaking: the MacOSX .dmg that is downloaded is NOT a package, > but the official MacOSX disk image format, like .iso or .nrg or whatever > other formats exist. Like any CD distributed with many magazines containing > lots and lots of software. That's not different. > Did you write to all those magazines as well? > > When installing AutoCP generators on MacOSX, they are still NOT inside the > Hugin packages but installed elsewhere. > The separate packes are in a separate Folder "on the CD" and come with a > Readme when and where you can use them. > Inside the packages you will find again the Readme.* > > Harry -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx
Re: [hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions
2009/12/25 DaveN > > Could you be more specific? Which hugin download includes > autopano-sift-C? > > Getting source and compile yourself is not the same as download. > > The Mac downloads include it in the compiled version downloads (tested > 0.8.0 and 2009.4.0). I have not tested the Windows precompiled > versions. > > Here is a link to the 2009.4.0 download: > > > http://sourceforge.net/projects/hugin/files/hugin/hugin-2009.4/hugin-mac-2009.4.0.dmg/download > > As mentioned by me about 30 mails ago in this same thread: *Just for complete reference to both Mac and non-Mac users: The 2009.2 was the first to include the AutoCP generators but NOT inside Hugin. They are delivered with the package as separate packages. Technically speaking: the MacOSX .dmg that is downloaded is NOT a package, but the official MacOSX disk image format, like .iso or .nrg or whatever other formats exist. Like any CD distributed with many magazines containing lots and lots of software. That's not different. Did you write to all those magazines as well? When installing AutoCP generators on MacOSX, they are still NOT inside the Hugin packages but installed elsewhere. The separate packes are in a separate Folder "on the CD" and come with a Readme when and where you can use them. Inside the packages you will find again the Readme.* Harry -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx
[hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions
> Could you be more specific? Which hugin download includes autopano-sift-C? > Getting source and compile yourself is not the same as download. The Mac downloads include it in the compiled version downloads (tested 0.8.0 and 2009.4.0). I have not tested the Windows precompiled versions. Here is a link to the 2009.4.0 download: http://sourceforge.net/projects/hugin/files/hugin/hugin-2009.4/hugin-mac-2009.4.0.dmg/download On Dec 24, 11:47 pm, Kornel Benko wrote: > Am Freitag 25 Dezember 2009 schrieb DaveN: > > > It is very disingenuous to claim autopano-sift-C has nothing to do > > with Hugin and then include it in the Hugin download. > > Could you be more specific? Which hugin download includes autopano-sift-C? > Getting source and compile yourself is not the same as download. > > Please have a look athttp://hugin.sourceforge.net/releases/2009.4.0/en.shtml, > Control point generators. > > Kornel > > -- > Kornel Benko > kornel.be...@berlin.de > > signature.asc > < 1KViewDownload -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx
Re: [hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions
Am Freitag 25 Dezember 2009 schrieb DaveN: > It is very disingenuous to claim autopano-sift-C has nothing to do > with Hugin and then include it in the Hugin download. Could you be more specific? Which hugin download includes autopano-sift-C? Getting source and compile yourself is not the same as download. Please have a look at http://hugin.sourceforge.net/releases/2009.4.0/en.shtml, Control point generators. Kornel -- Kornel Benko kornel.be...@berlin.de signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
[hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions
It is very disingenuous to claim autopano-sift-C has nothing to do with Hugin and then include it in the Hugin download. On Dec 23, 3:47 pm, Bruno Postle wrote: > On Wed 23-Dec-2009 at 22:42 +, michael crane wrote: > > >can somebody clear this up. > >is hugin using copyrighted/ patented stuff when it shouldn't ? > >regards > > Everything in Hugin is copyrighted. > > If you use autopano-sift-C (which isn't part of Hugin), you get a > big warning every time you use it telling you that SIFT is patented > in the USA and that you need to contact the patent holder for > 'commercial use' in the USA. > > This thread has nothing to do with Hugin, you are being trolled. > > -- > Bruno -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx
Re: [hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions
"I'm sure this will be resolved in the coming weeks." Can you clarify what you mean by that? I'm sort of new to the community, and may have missed something. On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 3:34 PM, Dale Beams wrote: > Hugin itself, no > > Hugin is a gui for a number of underlying programs. Of those programs > autopano-* and panomatic both are optional install. Both of these programs > are automatic control point finders. You can locate control points by hand > without these programs. > > There is some question on what allowable rights these programs have granted > in the use of Hugin. Currently these programs appear to be patented, but > allowed for use in Hugin, as Hugin is not a commercial product. > > Panos created with Hugin that use these two particular programs imho, are > patent and copyright free, though the question has been asked if they are > still free when the pano's themselves are sold. In other words, does the > sale of the pano's constitute commercial use of Hugin. > > I'm sure this will be resolved in the coming weeks. > > > Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2009 22:42:37 + > > > Subject: Re: [hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions > > From: mick.cr...@gmail.com > > > To: hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com > > > > can somebody clear this up. > > is hugin using copyrighted/ patented stuff when it shouldn't ? > > regards > > > > mick > > > > > > > > > > > > 2009/12/23 Roger Howard : > > > > > > On Tue, 22 Dec 2009 19:03:07 -0800 (PST), DaveN < > tahoedave...@yahoo.com> > > > wrote: > > >> No. My bottom line is that if you use a patented algorithm to make a > > >> panorama for profit without paying the inventor of the algorithm, can > > >> you be outraged if your panorama is used by others without payment to > > >> you. > > > > > > Yes, if you understand the difference between patents and copyright and > > > happen to have a distinctly different opinion on each based on their > > > distinctly different functions. > > > > > > Yes, if as a user of an application - and not an implementor of > algorithms > > > - you reasonably assume that you may use the application as you see > fit, > > > and that you shouldn't be in the position of vetting each algorithm > used > > > within the application for patent issues. > > > > > > -- > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. > > > A list of frequently asked questions is available at: > http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ > > > To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > > > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx > > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. > > A list of frequently asked questions is available at: > http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ > > To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx > > -- > Hotmail: Powerful Free email with security by Microsoft. Get it > now.<http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/171222986/direct/01/> > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. > A list of frequently asked questions is available at: > http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ > To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx
Re: [hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions
On Wed 23-Dec-2009 at 22:42 +, michael crane wrote: >can somebody clear this up. >is hugin using copyrighted/ patented stuff when it shouldn't ? >regards Everything in Hugin is copyrighted. If you use autopano-sift-C (which isn't part of Hugin), you get a big warning every time you use it telling you that SIFT is patented in the USA and that you need to contact the patent holder for 'commercial use' in the USA. This thread has nothing to do with Hugin, you are being trolled. -- Bruno -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx
RE: [hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions
Hugin itself, no Hugin is a gui for a number of underlying programs. Of those programs autopano-* and panomatic both are optional install. Both of these programs are automatic control point finders. You can locate control points by hand without these programs. There is some question on what allowable rights these programs have granted in the use of Hugin. Currently these programs appear to be patented, but allowed for use in Hugin, as Hugin is not a commercial product. Panos created with Hugin that use these two particular programs imho, are patent and copyright free, though the question has been asked if they are still free when the pano's themselves are sold. In other words, does the sale of the pano's constitute commercial use of Hugin. I'm sure this will be resolved in the coming weeks. > Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2009 22:42:37 +0000 > Subject: Re: [hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions > From: mick.cr...@gmail.com > To: hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com > > can somebody clear this up. > is hugin using copyrighted/ patented stuff when it shouldn't ? > regards > > mick > > > > > > 2009/12/23 Roger Howard : > > > > On Tue, 22 Dec 2009 19:03:07 -0800 (PST), DaveN > > wrote: > >> No. My bottom line is that if you use a patented algorithm to make a > >> panorama for profit without paying the inventor of the algorithm, can > >> you be outraged if your panorama is used by others without payment to > >> you. > > > > Yes, if you understand the difference between patents and copyright and > > happen to have a distinctly different opinion on each based on their > > distinctly different functions. > > > > Yes, if as a user of an application - and not an implementor of algorithms > > - you reasonably assume that you may use the application as you see fit, > > and that you shouldn't be in the position of vetting each algorithm used > > within the application for patent issues. > > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. > > A list of frequently asked questions is available at: > > http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ > > To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > > For more options, visit this group at > > http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. > A list of frequently asked questions is available at: > http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ > To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx _ Hotmail: Powerful Free email with security by Microsoft. http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/171222986/direct/01/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx
Re: [hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions
can somebody clear this up. is hugin using copyrighted/ patented stuff when it shouldn't ? regards mick 2009/12/23 Roger Howard : > > On Tue, 22 Dec 2009 19:03:07 -0800 (PST), DaveN > wrote: >> No. My bottom line is that if you use a patented algorithm to make a >> panorama for profit without paying the inventor of the algorithm, can >> you be outraged if your panorama is used by others without payment to >> you. > > Yes, if you understand the difference between patents and copyright and > happen to have a distinctly different opinion on each based on their > distinctly different functions. > > Yes, if as a user of an application - and not an implementor of algorithms > - you reasonably assume that you may use the application as you see fit, > and that you shouldn't be in the position of vetting each algorithm used > within the application for patent issues. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. > A list of frequently asked questions is available at: > http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ > To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx
Re: [hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions
On Tue, 22 Dec 2009 19:03:07 -0800 (PST), DaveN wrote: > No. My bottom line is that if you use a patented algorithm to make a > panorama for profit without paying the inventor of the algorithm, can > you be outraged if your panorama is used by others without payment to > you. Yes, if you understand the difference between patents and copyright and happen to have a distinctly different opinion on each based on their distinctly different functions. Yes, if as a user of an application - and not an implementor of algorithms - you reasonably assume that you may use the application as you see fit, and that you shouldn't be in the position of vetting each algorithm used within the application for patent issues. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx
RE: [hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions
Interesting discussion no nabble. I noticed there the same comment, that patent holders allow others to use their patent for free. I'd suggest that Hugin take the initiative and contact the patent holders and get an authorization to use the algorithm free of charge. This is the easiest solution. I'm sure they are already aware of Hugin and it's use of their algorithms. Upon a yes or no, this can be included in the documentation. Upon a no, I'd like to suggest Hugin appeal to the open source developer community via Slashdot, or etc. and/or mathematicians to develop a patent free photo matching algorithm. If necessary, put up a bounty. I'd also suggest that any individual or company accepting the challenge be required to publicly state their intentions to prevent reversal of license and patent holders in the future. I do find it odd that the patent and copyright information is not in the current documentation. As good as this group is about finding omissions in other work in the Hugin code I would have assumed this was already there. > Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2009 05:06:23 -0800 > Subject: [hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions > From: bavanan...@gmail.com > To: hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com > > Upon reading a bit further in the same OpenCV thread, I found a > mention of different, possibly less patent-restricted algorithms [5]. > Could be interesting! Further investigation needed... > > [5] http://n2.nabble.com/SURF-protected-by-patent-tp3458734p3463927.html > > -- > Bart > > On 23 dec, 13:59, Bart van Andel wrote: > > On 23 dec, 04:46, DaveN wrote: > > > > > From the SURF page (interesting that the SURF page says it is > > > copyrighted but there is no mention of a patent) > > > > I checked the files they provide, and those contain a LICENSE file, > > which I'll quote below. Indeed nothing is mentioned about patents > > anywhere. I've checked 2 papers on the subject [0-1]: nothing there > > either, nor is it mentioned on the Wikipedia page [2]. On an OpenCV > > discussion [3] however I found a link to a page that show that indeed > > there is a patent [4] (full text available from that site, upper > > right). > > > > [0]ftp://ftp.vision.ee.ethz.ch/publications/articles/eth_biwi_00517.pdf > > [1]http://www.vision.ee.ethz.ch/~surf/eccv06.pdf > > [2]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SURF > > [3]http://n2.nabble.com/SURF-protected-by-patent-td3458734.html > > [4]http://v3.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?CC=EP&NR=2027558A2&;... > > > > -- > > Bart > > > > - > > LICENSE CONDITIONS > > > > Copyright (2006): ETH Zurich, Switzerland > > Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium > > All rights reserved. > > > > For details, see the paper: > > Herbert Bay, Tinne Tuytelaars, Luc Van Gool, > > "SURF: Speeded Up Robust Features" > > Proceedings of the ninth European Conference on Computer Vision, May > > 2006 > > > > Permission to use, copy, modify, and distribute this software and > > its documentation for educational, research, and non-commercial > > purposes, without fee and without a signed licensing agreement, is > > hereby granted, provided that the above copyright notice and this > > paragraph appear in all copies modifications, and distributions. > > > > Any commercial use or any redistribution of this software > > requires a license from one of the above mentioned establishments. > > > > For further details, contact Andreas Ess (@vision.ee.ethz.ch). > > - > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. > A list of frequently asked questions is available at: > http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ > To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx _ Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft’s powerful SPAM protection. http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/177141664/direct/01/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx
[hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions
Upon reading a bit further in the same OpenCV thread, I found a mention of different, possibly less patent-restricted algorithms [5]. Could be interesting! Further investigation needed... [5] http://n2.nabble.com/SURF-protected-by-patent-tp3458734p3463927.html -- Bart On 23 dec, 13:59, Bart van Andel wrote: > On 23 dec, 04:46, DaveN wrote: > > > From the SURF page (interesting that the SURF page says it is > > copyrighted but there is no mention of a patent) > > I checked the files they provide, and those contain a LICENSE file, > which I'll quote below. Indeed nothing is mentioned about patents > anywhere. I've checked 2 papers on the subject [0-1]: nothing there > either, nor is it mentioned on the Wikipedia page [2]. On an OpenCV > discussion [3] however I found a link to a page that show that indeed > there is a patent [4] (full text available from that site, upper > right). > > [0]ftp://ftp.vision.ee.ethz.ch/publications/articles/eth_biwi_00517.pdf > [1]http://www.vision.ee.ethz.ch/~surf/eccv06.pdf > [2]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SURF > [3]http://n2.nabble.com/SURF-protected-by-patent-td3458734.html > [4]http://v3.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?CC=EP&NR=2027558A2&;... > > -- > Bart > > - > LICENSE CONDITIONS > > Copyright (2006): ETH Zurich, Switzerland > Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium > All rights reserved. > > For details, see the paper: > Herbert Bay, Tinne Tuytelaars, Luc Van Gool, > "SURF: Speeded Up Robust Features" > Proceedings of the ninth European Conference on Computer Vision, May > 2006 > > Permission to use, copy, modify, and distribute this software and > its documentation for educational, research, and non-commercial > purposes, without fee and without a signed licensing agreement, is > hereby granted, provided that the above copyright notice and this > paragraph appear in all copies modifications, and distributions. > > Any commercial use or any redistribution of this software > requires a license from one of the above mentioned establishments. > > For further details, contact Andreas Ess (@vision.ee.ethz.ch). > - -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx
[hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions
On 23 dec, 04:46, DaveN wrote: > From the SURF page (interesting that the SURF page says it is > copyrighted but there is no mention of a patent) I checked the files they provide, and those contain a LICENSE file, which I'll quote below. Indeed nothing is mentioned about patents anywhere. I've checked 2 papers on the subject [0-1]: nothing there either, nor is it mentioned on the Wikipedia page [2]. On an OpenCV discussion [3] however I found a link to a page that show that indeed there is a patent [4] (full text available from that site, upper right). [0] ftp://ftp.vision.ee.ethz.ch/publications/articles/eth_biwi_00517.pdf [1] http://www.vision.ee.ethz.ch/~surf/eccv06.pdf [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SURF [3] http://n2.nabble.com/SURF-protected-by-patent-td3458734.html [4] http://v3.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?CC=EP&NR=2027558A2&FT=D -- Bart - LICENSE CONDITIONS Copyright (2006): ETH Zurich, Switzerland Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium All rights reserved. For details, see the paper: Herbert Bay, Tinne Tuytelaars, Luc Van Gool, "SURF: Speeded Up Robust Features" Proceedings of the ninth European Conference on Computer Vision, May 2006 Permission to use, copy, modify, and distribute this software and its documentation for educational, research, and non-commercial purposes, without fee and without a signed licensing agreement, is hereby granted, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph appear in all copies modifications, and distributions. Any commercial use or any redistribution of this software requires a license from one of the above mentioned establishments. For further details, contact Andreas Ess (@vision.ee.ethz.ch). - -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx
RE: [hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions
Hugin also allows panos to be made by hand without any use of SIFT or SURF. So, following your argument, you would first have to determine if the pano had been made with SIFT, SURF, or by hand. More importantly you would also have to request information from the patent holder on who had been granted patents rights. Using any pano created by Hugin would be considered copyright violation, as you wouldn't know before what method was used. Is this a risk any person is willing to take? As an individual whose done pano's by hand, anybody using pano's i've created without my prior approval I would consider in violation of copyright and would exercise my legal rights. > Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2009 20:48:53 -0800 > Subject: [hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions > From: tahoedave...@yahoo.com > To: hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com > > Hugin in itself is not commercial but if you are making panoramas > using Hugin and SIFT and selling the panoramas, that is a commercial > use of SIFT. If you are making them for fun, that isn't a commercial > use. > > Patents take time to be issued so it is not uncommon for research to > be released before a patent is granted but it may have been applied > for much earlier. > > On Dec 22, 8:30 pm, Dale Beams wrote: > > As I recall, SIFT was released prior to patent or permission (research > > would have to be done). How it was released prior to the Uni bringing it > > back so to speak. > > > > Are the derivatives based from the original release? > > > > Commercial would have to be defined. Hugin may not qualify as a commercial > > applications because no monetary exchanged has been made. > > > > Because Hugin and it's ability to use outside source builds or binaries of > > these programs are non-commercial, Hugin could conceivably include these in > > thier programs and be free and clear > > > > Cheers ... :) > > > > > Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2009 19:46:53 -0800 > > > Subject: [hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions > > > From: tahoedave...@yahoo.com > > > To: hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com > > > > > SIFT and SURF prohibit commercial application without a license (or > > > waiver in the case of SURF). From the SIFT site: > > > > >http://people.cs.ubc.ca/~lowe/keypoints/ > > > This demo software is provided for research purposes only. A license > > > must be obtained from the University of British Columbia for any > > > commercial applications. The sofware is protected under a US patent as > > > listed below. This demo software is a research implementation, while > > > the licensed software has been further optimized for speed and to > > > provide a range of other capabilities. See the LICENSE file provided > > > with the demo software. > > > > > From the SURF page (interesting that the SURF page says it is > > > copyrighted but there is no mention of a patent) > > > > >http://www.vision.ee.ethz.ch/~surf/download.html > > > SURF is noncommercial. You may not use this work for commercial > > > purposes. For any reuse or distribution, you must make clear to others > > > the license terms of this work. Any of these conditions can be waived > > > if you get written permission from the copyright holder. > > > > > However, the third party SIFT and SURF implementations are less clear > > > but then they don't own the patents. > > > > > On Dec 22, 7:16 pm, Dale Beams wrote: > > > > The real question is, does the SIFT or SURF patent author allow or > > > > disallow the use of the patent without payment? > > > > > > There are many software patents within the Free Software Foundation and > > > > others in which use of that patent requires no monetary reimbursement. > > > > > > Perhaps the patent obligations should be stated in the source and/or > > > > binary of the download. > > > > > > Simply because it's patented does not mean that it requires payment > > > > from the author. > > > > > > > Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2009 19:03:07 -0800 > > > > > Subject: [hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions > > > > > From: tahoedave...@yahoo.com > > > > > To: hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com > > > > > > > No. My bottom line is that if you use a patented algorithm to make a > > > > > panorama for profit without paying the inventor of the algorithm, can > > > > > you be outraged if your panorama is used by others without payment to > > > > > you. I do not support a per
[hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions
Hugin in itself is not commercial but if you are making panoramas using Hugin and SIFT and selling the panoramas, that is a commercial use of SIFT. If you are making them for fun, that isn't a commercial use. Patents take time to be issued so it is not uncommon for research to be released before a patent is granted but it may have been applied for much earlier. On Dec 22, 8:30 pm, Dale Beams wrote: > As I recall, SIFT was released prior to patent or permission (research would > have to be done). How it was released prior to the Uni bringing it back so > to speak. > > Are the derivatives based from the original release? > > Commercial would have to be defined. Hugin may not qualify as a commercial > applications because no monetary exchanged has been made. > > Because Hugin and it's ability to use outside source builds or binaries of > these programs are non-commercial, Hugin could conceivably include these in > thier programs and be free and clear > > Cheers ... :) > > > Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2009 19:46:53 -0800 > > Subject: [hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions > > From: tahoedave...@yahoo.com > > To: hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com > > > SIFT and SURF prohibit commercial application without a license (or > > waiver in the case of SURF). From the SIFT site: > > >http://people.cs.ubc.ca/~lowe/keypoints/ > > This demo software is provided for research purposes only. A license > > must be obtained from the University of British Columbia for any > > commercial applications. The sofware is protected under a US patent as > > listed below. This demo software is a research implementation, while > > the licensed software has been further optimized for speed and to > > provide a range of other capabilities. See the LICENSE file provided > > with the demo software. > > > From the SURF page (interesting that the SURF page says it is > > copyrighted but there is no mention of a patent) > > >http://www.vision.ee.ethz.ch/~surf/download.html > > SURF is noncommercial. You may not use this work for commercial > > purposes. For any reuse or distribution, you must make clear to others > > the license terms of this work. Any of these conditions can be waived > > if you get written permission from the copyright holder. > > > However, the third party SIFT and SURF implementations are less clear > > but then they don't own the patents. > > > On Dec 22, 7:16 pm, Dale Beams wrote: > > > The real question is, does the SIFT or SURF patent author allow or > > > disallow the use of the patent without payment? > > > > There are many software patents within the Free Software Foundation and > > > others in which use of that patent requires no monetary reimbursement. > > > > Perhaps the patent obligations should be stated in the source and/or > > > binary of the download. > > > > Simply because it's patented does not mean that it requires payment from > > > the author. > > > > > Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2009 19:03:07 -0800 > > > > Subject: [hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions > > > > From: tahoedave...@yahoo.com > > > > To: hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com > > > > > No. My bottom line is that if you use a patented algorithm to make a > > > > panorama for profit without paying the inventor of the algorithm, can > > > > you be outraged if your panorama is used by others without payment to > > > > you. I do not support a per scene fee such as iPix had and the > > > > inventors of SIFT do not appear to be requesting that. I can deal > > > > with being flamed. That seems to be typical when someone points out > > > > the emperor has no clothes. > > > > > On Dec 22, 6:19 am, "my_daily_...@yahoo.co.uk" > > > > wrote: > > > > > The bottom line is that he is afraid to tell those patent holders that > > > > > he is willing to pay them for every image he stitched using their > > > > > methods. So, he came here to get general public support, but got flame > > > > > instead. And now he is in double trouble being alone with his shame of > > > > > using patented method and do not pay for them and without any general > > > > > public support. He will not sleep well now. ;-) > > > > > > DaveN, if you so sure that patented products need to be honored and > > > > > fees > > > > > payed, go ahead and pay them. Why do you need everyones opinion about > > > > > it. Not that I am against patented products, but against childish >
RE: [hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions
As I recall, SIFT was released prior to patent or permission (research would have to be done). How it was released prior to the Uni bringing it back so to speak. Are the derivatives based from the original release? Commercial would have to be defined. Hugin may not qualify as a commercial applications because no monetary exchanged has been made. Because Hugin and it's ability to use outside source builds or binaries of these programs are non-commercial, Hugin could conceivably include these in thier programs and be free and clear Cheers ... :) > Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2009 19:46:53 -0800 > Subject: [hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions > From: tahoedave...@yahoo.com > To: hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com > > SIFT and SURF prohibit commercial application without a license (or > waiver in the case of SURF). From the SIFT site: > > http://people.cs.ubc.ca/~lowe/keypoints/ > This demo software is provided for research purposes only. A license > must be obtained from the University of British Columbia for any > commercial applications. The sofware is protected under a US patent as > listed below. This demo software is a research implementation, while > the licensed software has been further optimized for speed and to > provide a range of other capabilities. See the LICENSE file provided > with the demo software. > > From the SURF page (interesting that the SURF page says it is > copyrighted but there is no mention of a patent) > > http://www.vision.ee.ethz.ch/~surf/download.html > SURF is noncommercial. You may not use this work for commercial > purposes. For any reuse or distribution, you must make clear to others > the license terms of this work. Any of these conditions can be waived > if you get written permission from the copyright holder. > > However, the third party SIFT and SURF implementations are less clear > but then they don't own the patents. > > On Dec 22, 7:16 pm, Dale Beams wrote: > > The real question is, does the SIFT or SURF patent author allow or disallow > > the use of the patent without payment? > > > > There are many software patents within the Free Software Foundation and > > others in which use of that patent requires no monetary reimbursement. > > > > Perhaps the patent obligations should be stated in the source and/or binary > > of the download. > > > > Simply because it's patented does not mean that it requires payment from > > the author. > > > > > > > > > Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2009 19:03:07 -0800 > > > Subject: [hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions > > > From: tahoedave...@yahoo.com > > > To: hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com > > > > > No. My bottom line is that if you use a patented algorithm to make a > > > panorama for profit without paying the inventor of the algorithm, can > > > you be outraged if your panorama is used by others without payment to > > > you. I do not support a per scene fee such as iPix had and the > > > inventors of SIFT do not appear to be requesting that. I can deal > > > with being flamed. That seems to be typical when someone points out > > > the emperor has no clothes. > > > > > On Dec 22, 6:19 am, "my_daily_...@yahoo.co.uk" > > > wrote: > > > > The bottom line is that he is afraid to tell those patent holders that > > > > he is willing to pay them for every image he stitched using their > > > > methods. So, he came here to get general public support, but got flame > > > > instead. And now he is in double trouble being alone with his shame of > > > > using patented method and do not pay for them and without any general > > > > public support. He will not sleep well now. ;-) > > > > > > DaveN, if you so sure that patented products need to be honored and fees > > > > payed, go ahead and pay them. Why do you need everyones opinion about > > > > it. Not that I am against patented products, but against childish > > > > position of individual: "If majority doing it this way it is good and I > > > > should follow them". I am sure if you would live in China your mind set > > > > would be different. What you are going to do with this general public > > > > support? Show group's threads in a court? > > > > > > Leonid > > > > > > Dale Beams wrote: > > > > > The question is who is SURF patented by? By a university or an > > > > > individual? > > > > > > > There are many patents within the linux/gpl community. However there > > > > > are organizations who have purcha
[hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions
SIFT and SURF prohibit commercial application without a license (or waiver in the case of SURF). From the SIFT site: http://people.cs.ubc.ca/~lowe/keypoints/ This demo software is provided for research purposes only. A license must be obtained from the University of British Columbia for any commercial applications. The sofware is protected under a US patent as listed below. This demo software is a research implementation, while the licensed software has been further optimized for speed and to provide a range of other capabilities. See the LICENSE file provided with the demo software. >From the SURF page (interesting that the SURF page says it is copyrighted but there is no mention of a patent) http://www.vision.ee.ethz.ch/~surf/download.html SURF is noncommercial. You may not use this work for commercial purposes. For any reuse or distribution, you must make clear to others the license terms of this work. Any of these conditions can be waived if you get written permission from the copyright holder. However, the third party SIFT and SURF implementations are less clear but then they don't own the patents. On Dec 22, 7:16 pm, Dale Beams wrote: > The real question is, does the SIFT or SURF patent author allow or disallow > the use of the patent without payment? > > There are many software patents within the Free Software Foundation and > others in which use of that patent requires no monetary reimbursement. > > Perhaps the patent obligations should be stated in the source and/or binary > of the download. > > Simply because it's patented does not mean that it requires payment from the > author. > > > > > Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2009 19:03:07 -0800 > > Subject: [hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions > > From: tahoedave...@yahoo.com > > To: hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com > > > No. My bottom line is that if you use a patented algorithm to make a > > panorama for profit without paying the inventor of the algorithm, can > > you be outraged if your panorama is used by others without payment to > > you. I do not support a per scene fee such as iPix had and the > > inventors of SIFT do not appear to be requesting that. I can deal > > with being flamed. That seems to be typical when someone points out > > the emperor has no clothes. > > > On Dec 22, 6:19 am, "my_daily_...@yahoo.co.uk" > > wrote: > > > The bottom line is that he is afraid to tell those patent holders that > > > he is willing to pay them for every image he stitched using their > > > methods. So, he came here to get general public support, but got flame > > > instead. And now he is in double trouble being alone with his shame of > > > using patented method and do not pay for them and without any general > > > public support. He will not sleep well now. ;-) > > > > DaveN, if you so sure that patented products need to be honored and fees > > > payed, go ahead and pay them. Why do you need everyones opinion about > > > it. Not that I am against patented products, but against childish > > > position of individual: "If majority doing it this way it is good and I > > > should follow them". I am sure if you would live in China your mind set > > > would be different. What you are going to do with this general public > > > support? Show group's threads in a court? > > > > Leonid > > > > Dale Beams wrote: > > > > The question is who is SURF patented by? By a university or an > > > > individual? > > > > > There are many patents within the linux/gpl community. However there > > > > are organizations who have purchased and protect those patents against > > > > litigation, opening up use for everyone. > > > > > Patents are being used to protect open source, gpl, and linux in > > > > general, and still allow the use of those patents to anybody. > > > > > Isn't this the same thing that SIFT and SURF have done? > > > > > > Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2009 19:19:25 +0100 > > > > > Subject: Re: [hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions > > > > > From: l.jirkov...@gmail.com > > > > > To: hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com > > > > > > 2009/12/18 DaveN : > > > > > > I thought SURF was also patented but maybe it is only the > > > > > > implementation that is copyrighted. I don't know for sure. It > > > > would > > > > > > be nice to see a patent-free control generator for Hugin though. > > > > I am > > > > > > not a programmer so I wouldn't be much help. Here is the wiki > > > >
[hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions
SIFT and SURF prohibit commercial application without a license (or waiver in the case of SURF). From the SIFT site: http://people.cs.ubc.ca/~lowe/keypoints/ This demo software is provided for research purposes only. A license must be obtained from the University of British Columbia for any commercial applications. The sofware is protected under a US patent as listed below. This demo software is a research implementation, while the licensed software has been further optimized for speed and to provide a range of other capabilities. See the LICENSE file provided with the demo software. >From the SURF page (interesting that the SURF page says it is copyrighted but there is no mention of a patent) http://www.vision.ee.ethz.ch/~surf/download.html SURF is noncommercial. You may not use this work for commercial purposes. For any reuse or distribution, you must make clear to others the license terms of this work. Any of these conditions can be waived if you get written permission from the copyright holder. However, the third party SIFT and SURF implementations are less clear but then they don't own the patents. On Dec 22, 7:16 pm, Dale Beams wrote: > The real question is, does the SIFT or SURF patent author allow or disallow > the use of the patent without payment? > > There are many software patents within the Free Software Foundation and > others in which use of that patent requires no monetary reimbursement. > > Perhaps the patent obligations should be stated in the source and/or binary > of the download. > > Simply because it's patented does not mean that it requires payment from the > author. > > > > > Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2009 19:03:07 -0800 > > Subject: [hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions > > From: tahoedave...@yahoo.com > > To: hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com > > > No. My bottom line is that if you use a patented algorithm to make a > > panorama for profit without paying the inventor of the algorithm, can > > you be outraged if your panorama is used by others without payment to > > you. I do not support a per scene fee such as iPix had and the > > inventors of SIFT do not appear to be requesting that. I can deal > > with being flamed. That seems to be typical when someone points out > > the emperor has no clothes. > > > On Dec 22, 6:19 am, "my_daily_...@yahoo.co.uk" > > wrote: > > > The bottom line is that he is afraid to tell those patent holders that > > > he is willing to pay them for every image he stitched using their > > > methods. So, he came here to get general public support, but got flame > > > instead. And now he is in double trouble being alone with his shame of > > > using patented method and do not pay for them and without any general > > > public support. He will not sleep well now. ;-) > > > > DaveN, if you so sure that patented products need to be honored and fees > > > payed, go ahead and pay them. Why do you need everyones opinion about > > > it. Not that I am against patented products, but against childish > > > position of individual: "If majority doing it this way it is good and I > > > should follow them". I am sure if you would live in China your mind set > > > would be different. What you are going to do with this general public > > > support? Show group's threads in a court? > > > > Leonid > > > > Dale Beams wrote: > > > > The question is who is SURF patented by? By a university or an > > > > individual? > > > > > There are many patents within the linux/gpl community. However there > > > > are organizations who have purchased and protect those patents against > > > > litigation, opening up use for everyone. > > > > > Patents are being used to protect open source, gpl, and linux in > > > > general, and still allow the use of those patents to anybody. > > > > > Isn't this the same thing that SIFT and SURF have done? > > > > > > Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2009 19:19:25 +0100 > > > > > Subject: Re: [hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions > > > > > From: l.jirkov...@gmail.com > > > > > To: hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com > > > > > > 2009/12/18 DaveN : > > > > > > I thought SURF was also patented but maybe it is only the > > > > > > implementation that is copyrighted. I don't know for sure. It > > > > would > > > > > > be nice to see a patent-free control generator for Hugin though. > > > > I am > > > > > > not a programmer so I wouldn't be much help. Here is the wiki > > > >
RE: [hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions
The real question is, does the SIFT or SURF patent author allow or disallow the use of the patent without payment? There are many software patents within the Free Software Foundation and others in which use of that patent requires no monetary reimbursement. Perhaps the patent obligations should be stated in the source and/or binary of the download. Simply because it's patented does not mean that it requires payment from the author. > Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2009 19:03:07 -0800 > Subject: [hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions > From: tahoedave...@yahoo.com > To: hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com > > No. My bottom line is that if you use a patented algorithm to make a > panorama for profit without paying the inventor of the algorithm, can > you be outraged if your panorama is used by others without payment to > you. I do not support a per scene fee such as iPix had and the > inventors of SIFT do not appear to be requesting that. I can deal > with being flamed. That seems to be typical when someone points out > the emperor has no clothes. > > On Dec 22, 6:19 am, "my_daily_...@yahoo.co.uk" > wrote: > > The bottom line is that he is afraid to tell those patent holders that > > he is willing to pay them for every image he stitched using their > > methods. So, he came here to get general public support, but got flame > > instead. And now he is in double trouble being alone with his shame of > > using patented method and do not pay for them and without any general > > public support. He will not sleep well now. ;-) > > > > DaveN, if you so sure that patented products need to be honored and fees > > payed, go ahead and pay them. Why do you need everyones opinion about > > it. Not that I am against patented products, but against childish > > position of individual: "If majority doing it this way it is good and I > > should follow them". I am sure if you would live in China your mind set > > would be different. What you are going to do with this general public > > support? Show group's threads in a court? > > > > Leonid > > > > Dale Beams wrote: > > > The question is who is SURF patented by? By a university or an > > > individual? > > > > > There are many patents within the linux/gpl community. However there > > > are organizations who have purchased and protect those patents against > > > litigation, opening up use for everyone. > > > > > Patents are being used to protect open source, gpl, and linux in > > > general, and still allow the use of those patents to anybody. > > > > > Isn't this the same thing that SIFT and SURF have done? > > > > > > Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2009 19:19:25 +0100 > > > > Subject: Re: [hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions > > > > From: l.jirkov...@gmail.com > > > > To: hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com > > > > > > 2009/12/18 DaveN : > > > > > I thought SURF was also patented but maybe it is only the > > > > > implementation that is copyrighted. I don't know for sure. It would > > > > > be nice to see a patent-free control generator for Hugin though. I > > > am > > > > > not a programmer so I wouldn't be much help. Here is the wiki page: > > > > > > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SURF > > > > > > > but you may have that already. > > > > > > You are still messing things up. SURF (the algorithm) is patented. You > > > > can patent algorithm (in meaning of technical procedure), but honestly > > > > there is only slight difference between patented algorithm and > > > > software patent so it may not be valid everywhere. But speaking about > > > > the software (implementation) the copyright law applies. > > > > > > > On Dec 18, 9:41 am, Dale Beams wrote: > > > > >> On that note, have you considered the SURF algorithm? > > > > > > >> It appears that SURF is closed source as well, but there appears > > > to be an "OpenSURF". > > > > > > >> This would be an interesting research topic. One of Hugin's goals > > > is to produce it's own auto cp detector or use a GPL version of one. > > > > > > >> Drop a note back on SURF. I'm interested in knowing what you find. > > > > > > >> > Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2009 09:20:46 -0800 > > > > >> > Subject: [hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions > > > > >> > From: tahoedave...@yahoo.com > > &
[hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions
No. My bottom line is that if you use a patented algorithm to make a panorama for profit without paying the inventor of the algorithm, can you be outraged if your panorama is used by others without payment to you. I do not support a per scene fee such as iPix had and the inventors of SIFT do not appear to be requesting that. I can deal with being flamed. That seems to be typical when someone points out the emperor has no clothes. On Dec 22, 6:19 am, "my_daily_...@yahoo.co.uk" wrote: > The bottom line is that he is afraid to tell those patent holders that > he is willing to pay them for every image he stitched using their > methods. So, he came here to get general public support, but got flame > instead. And now he is in double trouble being alone with his shame of > using patented method and do not pay for them and without any general > public support. He will not sleep well now. ;-) > > DaveN, if you so sure that patented products need to be honored and fees > payed, go ahead and pay them. Why do you need everyones opinion about > it. Not that I am against patented products, but against childish > position of individual: "If majority doing it this way it is good and I > should follow them". I am sure if you would live in China your mind set > would be different. What you are going to do with this general public > support? Show group's threads in a court? > > Leonid > > Dale Beams wrote: > > The question is who is SURF patented by? By a university or an individual? > > > There are many patents within the linux/gpl community. However there > > are organizations who have purchased and protect those patents against > > litigation, opening up use for everyone. > > > Patents are being used to protect open source, gpl, and linux in > > general, and still allow the use of those patents to anybody. > > > Isn't this the same thing that SIFT and SURF have done? > > > > Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2009 19:19:25 +0100 > > > Subject: Re: [hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions > > > From: l.jirkov...@gmail.com > > > To: hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com > > > > 2009/12/18 DaveN : > > > > I thought SURF was also patented but maybe it is only the > > > > implementation that is copyrighted. I don't know for sure. It would > > > > be nice to see a patent-free control generator for Hugin though. I am > > > > not a programmer so I wouldn't be much help. Here is the wiki page: > > > > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SURF > > > > > but you may have that already. > > > > You are still messing things up. SURF (the algorithm) is patented. You > > > can patent algorithm (in meaning of technical procedure), but honestly > > > there is only slight difference between patented algorithm and > > > software patent so it may not be valid everywhere. But speaking about > > > the software (implementation) the copyright law applies. > > > > > On Dec 18, 9:41 am, Dale Beams wrote: > > > >> On that note, have you considered the SURF algorithm? > > > > >> It appears that SURF is closed source as well, but there appears > > to be an "OpenSURF". > > > > >> This would be an interesting research topic. One of Hugin's goals > > is to produce it's own auto cp detector or use a GPL version of one. > > > > >> Drop a note back on SURF. I'm interested in knowing what you find. > > > > >> > Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2009 09:20:46 -0800 > > > >> > Subject: [hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions > > > >> > From: tahoedave...@yahoo.com > > > >> > To: hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com > > > > >> > < > copyrighy > > > >> > infringement issues?>> > > > > >> > It is something that has been bothering me for a long time and never > > > >> > really has been discussed in the open. To me, the inventor of the > > > >> > SIFT algorithm deserves some benefit for his work but isn't really > > > >> > getting it. Sure SIFT has his University's approval for use in non- > > > >> > commercial work but that seems to be taken by many a bit liberally. > > > > >> > << To me, at first, it was like you are planning to > > > >> > release a derivative of Hugin yourself, but apparently I was wrong > > > >> > (which is good). Did you spot a Hugin rip-off somewhere? >> > > > > >> > You are right in that I have no plans on releasing
Re: [hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions
The bottom line is that he is afraid to tell those patent holders that he is willing to pay them for every image he stitched using their methods. So, he came here to get general public support, but got flame instead. And now he is in double trouble being alone with his shame of using patented method and do not pay for them and without any general public support. He will not sleep well now. ;-) DaveN, if you so sure that patented products need to be honored and fees payed, go ahead and pay them. Why do you need everyones opinion about it. Not that I am against patented products, but against childish position of individual: "If majority doing it this way it is good and I should follow them". I am sure if you would live in China your mind set would be different. What you are going to do with this general public support? Show group's threads in a court? Leonid Dale Beams wrote: > The question is who is SURF patented by? By a university or an individual? > > There are many patents within the linux/gpl community. However there > are organizations who have purchased and protect those patents against > litigation, opening up use for everyone. > > Patents are being used to protect open source, gpl, and linux in > general, and still allow the use of those patents to anybody. > > Isn't this the same thing that SIFT and SURF have done? > > > > Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2009 19:19:25 +0100 > > Subject: Re: [hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions > > From: l.jirkov...@gmail.com > > To: hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com > > > > 2009/12/18 DaveN : > > > I thought SURF was also patented but maybe it is only the > > > implementation that is copyrighted. I don't know for sure. It would > > > be nice to see a patent-free control generator for Hugin though. I am > > > not a programmer so I wouldn't be much help. Here is the wiki page: > > > > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SURF > > > > > > but you may have that already. > > > > You are still messing things up. SURF (the algorithm) is patented. You > > can patent algorithm (in meaning of technical procedure), but honestly > > there is only slight difference between patented algorithm and > > software patent so it may not be valid everywhere. But speaking about > > the software (implementation) the copyright law applies. > > > > > > > > On Dec 18, 9:41 am, Dale Beams wrote: > > >> On that note, have you considered the SURF algorithm? > > >> > > >> It appears that SURF is closed source as well, but there appears > to be an "OpenSURF". > > >> > > >> This would be an interesting research topic. One of Hugin's goals > is to produce it's own auto cp detector or use a GPL version of one. > > >> > > >> Drop a note back on SURF. I'm interested in knowing what you find. > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2009 09:20:46 -0800 > > >> > Subject: [hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions > > >> > From: tahoedave...@yahoo.com > > >> > To: hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com > > >> > > >> > < copyrighy > > >> > infringement issues?>> > > >> > > >> > It is something that has been bothering me for a long time and never > > >> > really has been discussed in the open. To me, the inventor of the > > >> > SIFT algorithm deserves some benefit for his work but isn't really > > >> > getting it. Sure SIFT has his University's approval for use in non- > > >> > commercial work but that seems to be taken by many a bit liberally. > > >> > > >> > << To me, at first, it was like you are planning to > > >> > release a derivative of Hugin yourself, but apparently I was wrong > > >> > (which is good). Did you spot a Hugin rip-off somewhere? >> > > >> > > >> > You are right in that I have no plans on releasing a derivative of > > >> > Hugin and I don't know of any Hugin rip-offs. I have been > evaluating > > >> > options for Mac 10.6 and it looks like Autopano Pro is my only > > >> > alternative if I want to use SIFT. > > >> > > >> > On Dec 18, 8:53 am, Bart van Andel wrote: > > >> > > On 18 dec, 16:33, DaveN wrote: > > >> > > >> > > > Regardless, I seem to be beating a dead horse here. It is > clear the > > >> >
RE: [hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions
The question is who is SURF patented by? By a university or an individual? There are many patents within the linux/gpl community. However there are organizations who have purchased and protect those patents against litigation, opening up use for everyone. Patents are being used to protect open source, gpl, and linux in general, and still allow the use of those patents to anybody. Isn't this the same thing that SIFT and SURF have done? > Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2009 19:19:25 +0100 > Subject: Re: [hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions > From: l.jirkov...@gmail.com > To: hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com > > 2009/12/18 DaveN : > > I thought SURF was also patented but maybe it is only the > > implementation that is copyrighted. I don't know for sure. It would > > be nice to see a patent-free control generator for Hugin though. I am > > not a programmer so I wouldn't be much help. Here is the wiki page: > > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SURF > > > > but you may have that already. > > You are still messing things up. SURF (the algorithm) is patented. You > can patent algorithm (in meaning of technical procedure), but honestly > there is only slight difference between patented algorithm and > software patent so it may not be valid everywhere. But speaking about > the software (implementation) the copyright law applies. > > > > > On Dec 18, 9:41 am, Dale Beams wrote: > >> On that note, have you considered the SURF algorithm? > >> > >> It appears that SURF is closed source as well, but there appears to be an > >> "OpenSURF". > >> > >> This would be an interesting research topic. One of Hugin's goals is to > >> produce it's own auto cp detector or use a GPL version of one. > >> > >> Drop a note back on SURF. I'm interested in knowing what you find. > >> > >> > >> > >> > Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2009 09:20:46 -0800 > >> > Subject: [hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions > >> > From: tahoedave...@yahoo.com > >> > To: hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com > >> > >> > < >> > infringement issues?>> > >> > >> > It is something that has been bothering me for a long time and never > >> > really has been discussed in the open. To me, the inventor of the > >> > SIFT algorithm deserves some benefit for his work but isn't really > >> > getting it. Sure SIFT has his University's approval for use in non- > >> > commercial work but that seems to be taken by many a bit liberally. > >> > >> > << To me, at first, it was like you are planning to > >> > release a derivative of Hugin yourself, but apparently I was wrong > >> > (which is good). Did you spot a Hugin rip-off somewhere? >> > >> > >> > You are right in that I have no plans on releasing a derivative of > >> > Hugin and I don't know of any Hugin rip-offs. I have been evaluating > >> > options for Mac 10.6 and it looks like Autopano Pro is my only > >> > alternative if I want to use SIFT. > >> > >> > On Dec 18, 8:53 am, Bart van Andel wrote: > >> > > On 18 dec, 16:33, DaveN wrote: > >> > >> > > > Regardless, I seem to be beating a dead horse here. It is clear the > >> > > > feeling here, IMHO, is 'I follow the rules I see fit, ignore the ones > >> > > > I don't see as fit, and have no issue in expecting that my work will > >> > > > not be infringed upon.' > >> > >> > > Luckily, that's just your opinion. > >> > >> > > But I wonder, why are you asking about these patent and/or copyrighy > >> > > infringement issues? To me, at first, it was like you are planning to > >> > > release a derivative of Hugin yourself, but apparently I was wrong > >> > > (which is good). Did you spot a Hugin rip-off somewhere? > >> > >> > > -- > >> > > Bart > >> > >> > -- > >> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > >> > Groups "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. > >> > A list of frequently asked questions is available > >> > at:http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ > >> > To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com > >> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > >> > hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > >> > For more options,
Re: [hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions
2009/12/18 DaveN : > I thought SURF was also patented but maybe it is only the > implementation that is copyrighted. I don't know for sure. It would > be nice to see a patent-free control generator for Hugin though. I am > not a programmer so I wouldn't be much help. Here is the wiki page: > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SURF > > but you may have that already. You are still messing things up. SURF (the algorithm) is patented. You can patent algorithm (in meaning of technical procedure), but honestly there is only slight difference between patented algorithm and software patent so it may not be valid everywhere. But speaking about the software (implementation) the copyright law applies. > > On Dec 18, 9:41 am, Dale Beams wrote: >> On that note, have you considered the SURF algorithm? >> >> It appears that SURF is closed source as well, but there appears to be an >> "OpenSURF". >> >> This would be an interesting research topic. One of Hugin's goals is to >> produce it's own auto cp detector or use a GPL version of one. >> >> Drop a note back on SURF. I'm interested in knowing what you find. >> >> >> >> > Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2009 09:20:46 -0800 >> > Subject: [hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions >> > From: tahoedave...@yahoo.com >> > To: hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com >> >> > <> > infringement issues?>> >> >> > It is something that has been bothering me for a long time and never >> > really has been discussed in the open. To me, the inventor of the >> > SIFT algorithm deserves some benefit for his work but isn't really >> > getting it. Sure SIFT has his University's approval for use in non- >> > commercial work but that seems to be taken by many a bit liberally. >> >> > << To me, at first, it was like you are planning to >> > release a derivative of Hugin yourself, but apparently I was wrong >> > (which is good). Did you spot a Hugin rip-off somewhere? >> >> >> > You are right in that I have no plans on releasing a derivative of >> > Hugin and I don't know of any Hugin rip-offs. I have been evaluating >> > options for Mac 10.6 and it looks like Autopano Pro is my only >> > alternative if I want to use SIFT. >> >> > On Dec 18, 8:53 am, Bart van Andel wrote: >> > > On 18 dec, 16:33, DaveN wrote: >> >> > > > Regardless, I seem to be beating a dead horse here. It is clear the >> > > > feeling here, IMHO, is 'I follow the rules I see fit, ignore the ones >> > > > I don't see as fit, and have no issue in expecting that my work will >> > > > not be infringed upon.' >> >> > > Luckily, that's just your opinion. >> >> > > But I wonder, why are you asking about these patent and/or copyrighy >> > > infringement issues? To me, at first, it was like you are planning to >> > > release a derivative of Hugin yourself, but apparently I was wrong >> > > (which is good). Did you spot a Hugin rip-off somewhere? >> >> > > -- >> > > Bart >> >> > -- >> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> > "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. >> > A list of frequently asked questions is available >> > at:http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ >> > To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com >> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> > hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com >> > For more options, visit this group >> > athttp://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx >> >> _ >> Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM >> protection.http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/177141665/direct/01/ > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. > A list of frequently asked questions is available at: > http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ > To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx
[hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions
I thought SURF was also patented but maybe it is only the implementation that is copyrighted. I don't know for sure. It would be nice to see a patent-free control generator for Hugin though. I am not a programmer so I wouldn't be much help. Here is the wiki page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SURF but you may have that already. On Dec 18, 9:41 am, Dale Beams wrote: > On that note, have you considered the SURF algorithm? > > It appears that SURF is closed source as well, but there appears to be an > "OpenSURF". > > This would be an interesting research topic. One of Hugin's goals is to > produce it's own auto cp detector or use a GPL version of one. > > Drop a note back on SURF. I'm interested in knowing what you find. > > > > > Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2009 09:20:46 -0800 > > Subject: [hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions > > From: tahoedave...@yahoo.com > > To: hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com > > > < > infringement issues?>> > > > It is something that has been bothering me for a long time and never > > really has been discussed in the open. To me, the inventor of the > > SIFT algorithm deserves some benefit for his work but isn't really > > getting it. Sure SIFT has his University's approval for use in non- > > commercial work but that seems to be taken by many a bit liberally. > > > << To me, at first, it was like you are planning to > > release a derivative of Hugin yourself, but apparently I was wrong > > (which is good). Did you spot a Hugin rip-off somewhere? >> > > > You are right in that I have no plans on releasing a derivative of > > Hugin and I don't know of any Hugin rip-offs. I have been evaluating > > options for Mac 10.6 and it looks like Autopano Pro is my only > > alternative if I want to use SIFT. > > > On Dec 18, 8:53 am, Bart van Andel wrote: > > > On 18 dec, 16:33, DaveN wrote: > > > > > Regardless, I seem to be beating a dead horse here. It is clear the > > > > feeling here, IMHO, is 'I follow the rules I see fit, ignore the ones > > > > I don't see as fit, and have no issue in expecting that my work will > > > > not be infringed upon.' > > > > Luckily, that's just your opinion. > > > > But I wonder, why are you asking about these patent and/or copyrighy > > > infringement issues? To me, at first, it was like you are planning to > > > release a derivative of Hugin yourself, but apparently I was wrong > > > (which is good). Did you spot a Hugin rip-off somewhere? > > > > -- > > > Bart > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. > > A list of frequently asked questions is available > > at:http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ > > To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > > For more options, visit this group > > athttp://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx > > _ > Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM > protection.http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/177141665/direct/01/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx
Re: [hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions
2009/12/18 DaveN : > < infringement issues?>> > > It is something that has been bothering me for a long time and never > really has been discussed in the open. To me, the inventor of the > SIFT algorithm deserves some benefit for his work but isn't really > getting it. Sure SIFT has his University's approval for use in non- > commercial work but that seems to be taken by many a bit liberally. > > << To me, at first, it was like you are planning to > release a derivative of Hugin yourself, but apparently I was wrong > (which is good). Did you spot a Hugin rip-off somewhere? >> > > You are right in that I have no plans on releasing a derivative of > Hugin and I don't know of any Hugin rip-offs. I have been evaluating > options for Mac 10.6 and it looks like Autopano Pro is my only > alternative if I want to use SIFT. > > On Dec 18, 8:53 am, Bart van Andel wrote: >> On 18 dec, 16:33, DaveN wrote: >> >> > Regardless, I seem to be beating a dead horse here. It is clear the >> > feeling here, IMHO, is 'I follow the rules I see fit, ignore the ones >> > I don't see as fit, and have no issue in expecting that my work will >> > not be infringed upon.' >> >> Luckily, that's just your opinion. >> >> But I wonder, why are you asking about these patent and/or copyrighy >> infringement issues? To me, at first, it was like you are planning to >> release a derivative of Hugin yourself, but apparently I was wrong >> (which is good). Did you spot a Hugin rip-off somewhere? >> >> -- >> Bart > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. > A list of frequently asked questions is available at: > http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ > To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx Hi Dave, I think that the problem is your attitude to patents and what you thing they are. Moreover you are messing patent law and copyright law which are two completely different things. What are you talking about here are software patents which are only useless crap. Why? The greatest flaw of software patents is that you can't describe very well what software patent is and what is not. Actually, anything could become software patent. Numbers on the bottom pages in books etc. But to my point. The original purpose of patents was to encourage companies to develop new things and thus shift technology towards. This is certainly good thing but it can be used only in some specific industries like chemical industry or medicine. I'll try to explain it better. When you are developing new cure for cancer it costs you millions of dollars, because you have to pay researchers, medical testing and still 99% of your work is in vain. And when you would find the desired cure, any small factory could copy it and sell it much cheaper and the company which invented it would end up in red numbers. Patents are here to allow the company which invents new pills to have monopoly for some time. But what about software? Quite a lot of algorithms are invented by bored students. Does it cost that much? And even if it would, do you really think they have money to pay for patent? It could result (and I'm pretty sure it happens) that some company apply for the patent which was invented by someone else. And even if I knew that the idea origins to someone else I could barely do anything, because no casual people have enough money to pay dozens of the best lawyers. And what is even bigger problem - time. For some slowly moving industry 20 years (just example) are not that much and the chemical/whatewer would be still useful. But for software even a year may be too long. Image someone would patent quicksort or worse using "for" loops. The software industry would be stalled at one point for several years. have a nice day, Lukas -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx
RE: [hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions
On that note, have you considered the SURF algorithm? It appears that SURF is closed source as well, but there appears to be an "OpenSURF". This would be an interesting research topic. One of Hugin's goals is to produce it's own auto cp detector or use a GPL version of one. Drop a note back on SURF. I'm interested in knowing what you find. > Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2009 09:20:46 -0800 > Subject: [hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions > From: tahoedave...@yahoo.com > To: hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com > > < infringement issues?>> > > It is something that has been bothering me for a long time and never > really has been discussed in the open. To me, the inventor of the > SIFT algorithm deserves some benefit for his work but isn't really > getting it. Sure SIFT has his University's approval for use in non- > commercial work but that seems to be taken by many a bit liberally. > > << To me, at first, it was like you are planning to > release a derivative of Hugin yourself, but apparently I was wrong > (which is good). Did you spot a Hugin rip-off somewhere? >> > > You are right in that I have no plans on releasing a derivative of > Hugin and I don't know of any Hugin rip-offs. I have been evaluating > options for Mac 10.6 and it looks like Autopano Pro is my only > alternative if I want to use SIFT. > > On Dec 18, 8:53 am, Bart van Andel wrote: > > On 18 dec, 16:33, DaveN wrote: > > > > > Regardless, I seem to be beating a dead horse here. It is clear the > > > feeling here, IMHO, is 'I follow the rules I see fit, ignore the ones > > > I don't see as fit, and have no issue in expecting that my work will > > > not be infringed upon.' > > > > Luckily, that's just your opinion. > > > > But I wonder, why are you asking about these patent and/or copyrighy > > infringement issues? To me, at first, it was like you are planning to > > release a derivative of Hugin yourself, but apparently I was wrong > > (which is good). Did you spot a Hugin rip-off somewhere? > > > > -- > > Bart > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. > A list of frequently asked questions is available at: > http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ > To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx _ Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM protection. http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/177141665/direct/01/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx
[hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions
<> It is something that has been bothering me for a long time and never really has been discussed in the open. To me, the inventor of the SIFT algorithm deserves some benefit for his work but isn't really getting it. Sure SIFT has his University's approval for use in non- commercial work but that seems to be taken by many a bit liberally. << To me, at first, it was like you are planning to release a derivative of Hugin yourself, but apparently I was wrong (which is good). Did you spot a Hugin rip-off somewhere? >> You are right in that I have no plans on releasing a derivative of Hugin and I don't know of any Hugin rip-offs. I have been evaluating options for Mac 10.6 and it looks like Autopano Pro is my only alternative if I want to use SIFT. On Dec 18, 8:53 am, Bart van Andel wrote: > On 18 dec, 16:33, DaveN wrote: > > > Regardless, I seem to be beating a dead horse here. It is clear the > > feeling here, IMHO, is 'I follow the rules I see fit, ignore the ones > > I don't see as fit, and have no issue in expecting that my work will > > not be infringed upon.' > > Luckily, that's just your opinion. > > But I wonder, why are you asking about these patent and/or copyrighy > infringement issues? To me, at first, it was like you are planning to > release a derivative of Hugin yourself, but apparently I was wrong > (which is good). Did you spot a Hugin rip-off somewhere? > > -- > Bart -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx
Re: [hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions
On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 9:43 AM, DaveN wrote: > 'I follow the rules I see fit, ignore the ones > I don't see as fit, and have no issue in expecting that my work will > not be infringed upon. Repeating your argument doesn't make it any less off-topic. Neither does making up a straw-man. DR -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx
[hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions
On 18 dec, 16:33, DaveN wrote: > Regardless, I seem to be beating a dead horse here. It is clear the > feeling here, IMHO, is 'I follow the rules I see fit, ignore the ones > I don't see as fit, and have no issue in expecting that my work will > not be infringed upon.' Luckily, that's just your opinion. But I wonder, why are you asking about these patent and/or copyrighy infringement issues? To me, at first, it was like you are planning to release a derivative of Hugin yourself, but apparently I was wrong (which is good). Did you spot a Hugin rip-off somewhere? -- Bart -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx
Re: [hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions
2009/12/18 DaveN > The Mac version of Hugin does include the auto control point > generators in the download. I believe you are correct that China > technically does have copyright laws but they are rarely enforced as > you note. For all practical purposes, there is no patent or copyright > protection in China. > > Just for complete reference to both Mac and non-Mac users: The 2009.2 was the first to include the AutoCP generators but NOT inside Hugin. They are delivered with the package as separate packages. Technically speaking: the MacOSX .dmg that is downloaded is NOT a package, but the official MacOSX disk image format, like .iso or .nrg or whatever other formats exist. Like any CD distributed with many magazines containing lots and lots of software. That's not different. Did you write to all those magazines as well? When installing AutoCP generators on MacOSX, they are still NOT inside the Hugin packages but installed elsewhere. The separate packes are in a separate Folder "on the CD" and come with a Readme when and where you can use them. Inside the packages you will find again the Readme. Referring to China or any other country is completely irrelevant. Software and "other stuff" is pirated everywhere, no matter whether it is Open source, free or commercial closed source via bittorrent's or else. Harry -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx
RE: [hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions
It's not a novel idea, it's prior art. Putting pieces together to create a compisition has been done for ages. One of the earliest examples is the string grid an artist created to paint with, all around a single nodule point. One could even claim that Micheangelo's painting of the sistine chapel was a panoramic of heaven as he saw it, where he was the nodal point. Again, not a novel idea, but prior art. Anytime software is an extension of real world principles and does not introduce a new idea, it's not novel. Imagine if Galieo tried to patent gravity. We'd all be left hanging in the wind so to speak. Galieo didn't discover gravity, he recognized it. The same as any 3 year old child who stumble and falls on his face does. > Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2009 06:55:32 -0800 > Subject: [hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions > From: tahoedave...@yahoo.com > To: hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com > > < they are usually legit. >> > > Which brings me back to my original point. If you knowingly use > illegally package software to create a work, do you have a moral right > to be outraged if your work is stolen? > > On Dec 18, 3:01 am, "tennevin.yves" wrote: > > This has nothing to do with hugin. > > > > Free / nonfree software can be pirated everywhere in the world, what > > ever the local laws allowing this or not. > > Using an illegal copy of a software, being photoshop, hugin, windows or > > God know what is usually the user's responsability. > > > > For the materials producted by the those illegaly packaged software, > > they are usually legit. > > That does not mean the one using them risk nothing. > > > > It just means the copyright status of such medias is unrelated to how > > they were created. > > > > -- > > Yves Tennevin / esby free.fr > > > > http://esby.free.fr/contact.html > > > > DaveN wrote: > > > Copyright is largely ignored in China and other places so can people > > > in those places copy your images or repackage Hugin? > > > > > Bruno: Where is the other place to discuss Hugin where I can find > > > answers? > > > > > On Dec 17, 7:31 am, "tennevin.yves" wrote: > > > > >> Patents hold no ground in Europe. > > >> The Berne convention can still be applied, what ever the licence you > > >> choose for your image. > > >> And to DaveN comment, I ain't infringing any patent while located in > > >> Europe, so the moralistic opinion is bogus, but copyright laws can still > > >> be applied in Europe. > > > > >> -- > > >> Yves Tennevin / esby free.fr > > > > >>http://esby.free.fr/contact.html > > > > >> DaveN wrote: > > > > >>> Sure the IP rights are separate but that was not the question. If you > > >>> create an image infringing on a patent, can you in all honesty be > > >>> outraged if someone infringes on your rights to your image? > > > > >>> On Dec 17, 12:39 am, ArAgost wrote: > > > > >>>> IANAL and I'm no expert on patents, but note that whatever are the > > >>>> issues with the software, the intellectual property of the image is > > >>>> completely separate. > > > > >>>> On 17 Dic, 06:30, DaveN wrote: > > > > >>>>> The best control point generators out there are SIFT based (or the > > >>>>> software company doesn't tell you what the function is but it sure > > >>>>> seems to operate like SIFT). SIFT is patented however that patent is > > >>>>> largely ignored on the grounds that such patents don't apply in all > > >>>>> parts of the world. The current downloads for Hugin barely mention > > >>>>> the patent issue. > > > > >>>>> Copyrights are also largely ignored in some parts of the world. Using > > >>>>> the same logic as above, is it ok for someone in one of the parts of > > >>>>> the world that largely ignore copyrights to repackage a version of > > >>>>> Hugin and sell it as their own worldwide? Would it be ok if they did > > >>>>> so and only casually mentioned to the buyer to check their local laws > > >>>>> for any issues that may concern them locally? > > > > >>>>> If someone makes a commercial image from Hugin using a SIFT control > > >>>>> point generator and then posts the stitched image
[hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions
'I follow the rules I see fit, ignore the ones I don't see as fit, and have no issue in expecting that my work will not be infringed upon. On Dec 18, 7:34 am, Daniel Reetz wrote: > > Regardless, I seem to be beating a dead horse here. > > Yes. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx
Re: [hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions
> Regardless, I seem to be beating a dead horse here. Yes. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx
[hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions
p.s. If the method is not unique or novel, it would be easy to create a method to do the same using a different method but other than SIFT and SURF, there doesn't appear to be progress in that area. Sure there are Harris Corners but SIFT and SURF are much better methods. Regardless, I seem to be beating a dead horse here. It is clear the feeling here, IMHO, is 'I follow the rules I see fit, ignore the ones I don't see as fit, and have no issue in expecting that my work will not be infringed upon.' On Dec 18, 6:50 am, DaveN wrote: > It isn't the 'mathematical algorithm' that is patented but the novel > method for doing something. If it weren't so novel or original, then > why didn't someone think of it earlier? It seems most people on this > list think that their creations should be protected but the novel > thinking of others is meaningless. That seems to be quite self- > serving IMHO. You choose to follow the laws that suit you, ignore the > rest then expect others to follow the rules. > > On Dec 18, 2:59 am, JeCh wrote: > > > I would ask a different question. Is it moral to patent a mathematical > > algorithm? A don't think it should be patentable and so does the rest > > of the world except of USA and maybe Japan. Imagine someone patented > > Fourrier transformation... > > > If I use Hugin and SIFT based control point generators, I'm not > > breaking any law and I don't do anything immoral. > > > In fact the patent law is mainly used to slow down invention and > > evolution. Except of making less things patentable and for shorter > > time, some countries are going the other way we may see soon someone > > who will receive a patent for air breathing. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx
[hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions
<> Which brings me back to my original point. If you knowingly use illegally package software to create a work, do you have a moral right to be outraged if your work is stolen? On Dec 18, 3:01 am, "tennevin.yves" wrote: > This has nothing to do with hugin. > > Free / nonfree software can be pirated everywhere in the world, what > ever the local laws allowing this or not. > Using an illegal copy of a software, being photoshop, hugin, windows or > God know what is usually the user's responsability. > > For the materials producted by the those illegaly packaged software, > they are usually legit. > That does not mean the one using them risk nothing. > > It just means the copyright status of such medias is unrelated to how > they were created. > > -- > Yves Tennevin / esby free.fr > > http://esby.free.fr/contact.html > > DaveN wrote: > > Copyright is largely ignored in China and other places so can people > > in those places copy your images or repackage Hugin? > > > Bruno: Where is the other place to discuss Hugin where I can find > > answers? > > > On Dec 17, 7:31 am, "tennevin.yves" wrote: > > >> Patents hold no ground in Europe. > >> The Berne convention can still be applied, what ever the licence you > >> choose for your image. > >> And to DaveN comment, I ain't infringing any patent while located in > >> Europe, so the moralistic opinion is bogus, but copyright laws can still > >> be applied in Europe. > > >> -- > >> Yves Tennevin / esby free.fr > > >>http://esby.free.fr/contact.html > > >> DaveN wrote: > > >>> Sure the IP rights are separate but that was not the question. If you > >>> create an image infringing on a patent, can you in all honesty be > >>> outraged if someone infringes on your rights to your image? > > >>> On Dec 17, 12:39 am, ArAgost wrote: > > IANAL and I'm no expert on patents, but note that whatever are the > issues with the software, the intellectual property of the image is > completely separate. > > On 17 Dic, 06:30, DaveN wrote: > > > The best control point generators out there are SIFT based (or the > > software company doesn't tell you what the function is but it sure > > seems to operate like SIFT). SIFT is patented however that patent is > > largely ignored on the grounds that such patents don't apply in all > > parts of the world. The current downloads for Hugin barely mention > > the patent issue. > > > Copyrights are also largely ignored in some parts of the world. Using > > the same logic as above, is it ok for someone in one of the parts of > > the world that largely ignore copyrights to repackage a version of > > Hugin and sell it as their own worldwide? Would it be ok if they did > > so and only casually mentioned to the buyer to check their local laws > > for any issues that may concern them locally? > > > If someone makes a commercial image from Hugin using a SIFT control > > point generator and then posts the stitched image on the Internet and > > someone copies it, is that ok? > > > I'll duck now. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx
[hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions
It isn't the 'mathematical algorithm' that is patented but the novel method for doing something. If it weren't so novel or original, then why didn't someone think of it earlier? It seems most people on this list think that their creations should be protected but the novel thinking of others is meaningless. That seems to be quite self- serving IMHO. You choose to follow the laws that suit you, ignore the rest then expect others to follow the rules. On Dec 18, 2:59 am, JeCh wrote: > I would ask a different question. Is it moral to patent a mathematical > algorithm? A don't think it should be patentable and so does the rest > of the world except of USA and maybe Japan. Imagine someone patented > Fourrier transformation... > > If I use Hugin and SIFT based control point generators, I'm not > breaking any law and I don't do anything immoral. > > In fact the patent law is mainly used to slow down invention and > evolution. Except of making less things patentable and for shorter > time, some countries are going the other way we may see soon someone > who will receive a patent for air breathing. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx
[hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions
I would ask a different question. Is it moral to patent a mathematical algorithm? A don't think it should be patentable and so does the rest of the world except of USA and maybe Japan. Imagine someone patented Fourrier transformation... If I use Hugin and SIFT based control point generators, I'm not breaking any law and I don't do anything immoral. In fact the patent law is mainly used to slow down invention and evolution. Except of making less things patentable and for shorter time, some countries are going the other way we may see soon someone who will receive a patent for air breathing. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx
Re: [hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions
This has nothing to do with hugin. Free / nonfree software can be pirated everywhere in the world, what ever the local laws allowing this or not. Using an illegal copy of a software, being photoshop, hugin, windows or God know what is usually the user's responsability. For the materials producted by the those illegaly packaged software, they are usually legit. That does not mean the one using them risk nothing. It just means the copyright status of such medias is unrelated to how they were created. -- Yves Tennevin / esby free.fr http://esby.free.fr/contact.html DaveN wrote: > Copyright is largely ignored in China and other places so can people > in those places copy your images or repackage Hugin? > > Bruno: Where is the other place to discuss Hugin where I can find > answers? > > On Dec 17, 7:31 am, "tennevin.yves" wrote: > >> Patents hold no ground in Europe. >> The Berne convention can still be applied, what ever the licence you >> choose for your image. >> And to DaveN comment, I ain't infringing any patent while located in >> Europe, so the moralistic opinion is bogus, but copyright laws can still >> be applied in Europe. >> >> -- >> Yves Tennevin / esby free.fr >> >> http://esby.free.fr/contact.html >> >> DaveN wrote: >> >>> Sure the IP rights are separate but that was not the question. If you >>> create an image infringing on a patent, can you in all honesty be >>> outraged if someone infringes on your rights to your image? >>> >>> On Dec 17, 12:39 am, ArAgost wrote: >>> IANAL and I'm no expert on patents, but note that whatever are the issues with the software, the intellectual property of the image is completely separate. On 17 Dic, 06:30, DaveN wrote: > The best control point generators out there are SIFT based (or the > software company doesn't tell you what the function is but it sure > seems to operate like SIFT). SIFT is patented however that patent is > largely ignored on the grounds that such patents don't apply in all > parts of the world. The current downloads for Hugin barely mention > the patent issue. > > Copyrights are also largely ignored in some parts of the world. Using > the same logic as above, is it ok for someone in one of the parts of > the world that largely ignore copyrights to repackage a version of > Hugin and sell it as their own worldwide? Would it be ok if they did > so and only casually mentioned to the buyer to check their local laws > for any issues that may concern them locally? > > If someone makes a commercial image from Hugin using a SIFT control > point generator and then posts the stitched image on the Internet and > someone copies it, is that ok? > > I'll duck now. > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx
[hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions
Agreed. Panoramic photos in themselves are not patentable as they have been around for some time. I don't understand your second statement. With regards to iPiX and Photosphere, that was interesting. iPiX did sue photographers then were sued and settled with Pictosphere. iPiX then licensed Pictosphere's patent, went bankrupt and Pictosphere bought much of iPiX's remains. Now if you go to ipix.com, you get a page describing the virtues of Oxaal's patent portfolio. It is all a big mess. On Dec 17, 7:44 pm, Dale Beams wrote: > Panoramic photos have been around for some time. We've got a photo here in a > furniture store of downtown that was produced in 1890. > > Panoramic photos would not have a patent, or if it did would be defeated by > prior art. > > A methodology might be considered patentable, but then you would have to > pursue the patent infringer, in the case, ie, SIFT or SURF provided they > followed the patent to the letter. > > In regards to ipix, they attempted to sue photographers, and then got sued > themselves and lost to Pictosphere. > > ipix patent arguements were to broad, and prior art was used in court by > defendants of their lawsuits. > > > > > I am not sure you are right about the status of copyrighted works > > created with infringed works. I think there have been cases where the > > produced work has had to pay the owner of the patent. I am not an > > attorney but I think that is often use the threat of lawsuits in such > > cases to get money (iPix comes to mind). > > _ > Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM > protection.http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/177141665/direct/01/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx
RE: [hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions
Panoramic photos have been around for some time. We've got a photo here in a furniture store of downtown that was produced in 1890. Panoramic photos would not have a patent, or if it did would be defeated by prior art. A methodology might be considered patentable, but then you would have to pursue the patent infringer, in the case, ie, SIFT or SURF provided they followed the patent to the letter. In regards to ipix, they attempted to sue photographers, and then got sued themselves and lost to Pictosphere. ipix patent arguements were to broad, and prior art was used in court by defendants of their lawsuits. > > I am not sure you are right about the status of copyrighted works > created with infringed works. I think there have been cases where the > produced work has had to pay the owner of the patent. I am not an > attorney but I think that is often use the threat of lawsuits in such > cases to get money (iPix comes to mind). _ Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM protection. http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/177141665/direct/01/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx
[hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions
The Mac version of Hugin does include the auto control point generators in the download. I believe you are correct that China technically does have copyright laws but they are rarely enforced as you note. For all practical purposes, there is no patent or copyright protection in China. I am not sure you are right about the status of copyrighted works created with infringed works. I think there have been cases where the produced work has had to pay the owner of the patent. I am not an attorney but I think that is often use the threat of lawsuits in such cases to get money (iPix comes to mind). As far as copyright protection the artist's creation and a patent protecting the inventor's cash flow. It is also true the copyright protection protects the artist's cash flow and patents protect the inventor's invention. Yes you can do the control point matching by hand but I don't think that happens in most cases any more. On Dec 17, 5:54 pm, Dale Beams wrote: > An interesting post. > > In the US, fansubs, ie people subbing japanese anime and other foriegn movies > traditionally have been ignored in part because the content had not yet been > copyrighted in the US. Recently international trade agreements have changed > that. Now anime produced in Japan is copyrighted at it's inception just as > copyrighted products in the US are. I'm sure China falls under these > copyright restrictions as well, even if it's not enforced. > > (as i've understood it) > > There has never been a restriction on re-packaging GPL software as far as I > recall (other licenses need to be checked). For example there is a great GPL > desktop publishing software that could be packaged as well, and sold as any > other retail product. However, all GPL software REQUIRES you to notify the > user of the GPL license, prohibits you from removing the GPL license > notification and provide them with an option to obtain the source code. > > (as i've understood it) > > Patents, copyrights, & trademarks still require the company whose rights are > being infringed on to bring the lawsuit to court. This may be changing soon > in the US, as major media companies are trying to make > copyright/patent/trademark infringement a criminal rather than a civil matter. > > In regards to products produced from using Hugin in conjunction with patented > products, doesn't invalidate the copyright of the produced work. > > For example, as an artist, should I use a brand of paint or chalk for a > masterpiece, and there was a patented ingredient in the paint, the paint > would not invalidate my copyright. > > Copyright is there to protect the artist creation. Patents are there to > protect the inventors cash flow. > > This is why it's important to read the copyright. There is copyleft, > creative commons, gpl, etc. > > On a side note, I build my Hugin from scratch, so I'm not aware if Hugin > currently ships with either the SIFT or the SURF program included in binary > form or as part of the package or if it requires the user to download > separately those programs. I would assume it requires the user to make a > moral decision on downloading either of those two patented products. > > If I recall correctly one can do control point matching by hand. > > > > > Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 17:08:16 -0800 > > Subject: [hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions > > From: tahoedave...@yahoo.com > > To: hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com > > > Copyright is largely ignored in China and other places so can people > > in those places copy your images or repackage Hugin? > > > Bruno: Where is the other place to discuss Hugin where I can find > > answers? > > > On Dec 17, 7:31 am, "tennevin.yves" wrote: > > > Patents hold no ground in Europe. > > > The Berne convention can still be applied, what ever the licence you > > > choose for your image. > > > And to DaveN comment, I ain't infringing any patent while located in > > > Europe, so the moralistic opinion is bogus, but copyright laws can still > > > be applied in Europe. > > > > -- > > > Yves Tennevin / esby free.fr > > > >http://esby.free.fr/contact.html > > > > DaveN wrote: > > > > Sure the IP rights are separate but that was not the question. If you > > > > create an image infringing on a patent, can you in all honesty be > > > > outraged if someone infringes on your rights to your image? > > > > > On Dec 17, 12:39 am, ArAgost wrote: > > > > >> IANAL and I'm no expert on patents, but note that whatever are the > > > >> issues with the so
Re: [hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions
I have the feeling you're not into discussing hugin at all. DaveN schrieb am 18.12.09 02:08: > Copyright is largely ignored in China and other places so can people > in those places copy your images or repackage Hugin? > > Bruno: Where is the other place to discuss Hugin where I can find > answers? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx
RE: [hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions
An interesting post. In the US, fansubs, ie people subbing japanese anime and other foriegn movies traditionally have been ignored in part because the content had not yet been copyrighted in the US. Recently international trade agreements have changed that. Now anime produced in Japan is copyrighted at it's inception just as copyrighted products in the US are. I'm sure China falls under these copyright restrictions as well, even if it's not enforced. (as i've understood it) There has never been a restriction on re-packaging GPL software as far as I recall (other licenses need to be checked). For example there is a great GPL desktop publishing software that could be packaged as well, and sold as any other retail product. However, all GPL software REQUIRES you to notify the user of the GPL license, prohibits you from removing the GPL license notification and provide them with an option to obtain the source code. (as i've understood it) Patents, copyrights, & trademarks still require the company whose rights are being infringed on to bring the lawsuit to court. This may be changing soon in the US, as major media companies are trying to make copyright/patent/trademark infringement a criminal rather than a civil matter. In regards to products produced from using Hugin in conjunction with patented products, doesn't invalidate the copyright of the produced work. For example, as an artist, should I use a brand of paint or chalk for a masterpiece, and there was a patented ingredient in the paint, the paint would not invalidate my copyright. Copyright is there to protect the artist creation. Patents are there to protect the inventors cash flow. This is why it's important to read the copyright. There is copyleft, creative commons, gpl, etc. On a side note, I build my Hugin from scratch, so I'm not aware if Hugin currently ships with either the SIFT or the SURF program included in binary form or as part of the package or if it requires the user to download separately those programs. I would assume it requires the user to make a moral decision on downloading either of those two patented products. If I recall correctly one can do control point matching by hand. > Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 17:08:16 -0800 > Subject: [hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions > From: tahoedave...@yahoo.com > To: hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com > > Copyright is largely ignored in China and other places so can people > in those places copy your images or repackage Hugin? > > Bruno: Where is the other place to discuss Hugin where I can find > answers? > > On Dec 17, 7:31 am, "tennevin.yves" wrote: > > Patents hold no ground in Europe. > > The Berne convention can still be applied, what ever the licence you > > choose for your image. > > And to DaveN comment, I ain't infringing any patent while located in > > Europe, so the moralistic opinion is bogus, but copyright laws can still > > be applied in Europe. > > > > -- > > Yves Tennevin / esby free.fr > > > > http://esby.free.fr/contact.html > > > > DaveN wrote: > > > Sure the IP rights are separate but that was not the question. If you > > > create an image infringing on a patent, can you in all honesty be > > > outraged if someone infringes on your rights to your image? > > > > > On Dec 17, 12:39 am, ArAgost wrote: > > > > >> IANAL and I'm no expert on patents, but note that whatever are the > > >> issues with the software, the intellectual property of the image is > > >> completely separate. > > > > >> On 17 Dic, 06:30, DaveN wrote: > > > > >>> The best control point generators out there are SIFT based (or the > > >>> software company doesn't tell you what the function is but it sure > > >>> seems to operate like SIFT). SIFT is patented however that patent is > > >>> largely ignored on the grounds that such patents don't apply in all > > >>> parts of the world. The current downloads for Hugin barely mention > > >>> the patent issue. > > > > >>> Copyrights are also largely ignored in some parts of the world. Using > > >>> the same logic as above, is it ok for someone in one of the parts of > > >>> the world that largely ignore copyrights to repackage a version of > > >>> Hugin and sell it as their own worldwide? Would it be ok if they did > > >>> so and only casually mentioned to the buyer to check their local laws > > >>> for any issues that may concern them locally? > > > > >>> If someone makes a commercial image from Hugin using a SIFT control > >
[hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions
Copyright is largely ignored in China and other places so can people in those places copy your images or repackage Hugin? Bruno: Where is the other place to discuss Hugin where I can find answers? On Dec 17, 7:31 am, "tennevin.yves" wrote: > Patents hold no ground in Europe. > The Berne convention can still be applied, what ever the licence you > choose for your image. > And to DaveN comment, I ain't infringing any patent while located in > Europe, so the moralistic opinion is bogus, but copyright laws can still > be applied in Europe. > > -- > Yves Tennevin / esby free.fr > > http://esby.free.fr/contact.html > > DaveN wrote: > > Sure the IP rights are separate but that was not the question. If you > > create an image infringing on a patent, can you in all honesty be > > outraged if someone infringes on your rights to your image? > > > On Dec 17, 12:39 am, ArAgost wrote: > > >> IANAL and I'm no expert on patents, but note that whatever are the > >> issues with the software, the intellectual property of the image is > >> completely separate. > > >> On 17 Dic, 06:30, DaveN wrote: > > >>> The best control point generators out there are SIFT based (or the > >>> software company doesn't tell you what the function is but it sure > >>> seems to operate like SIFT). SIFT is patented however that patent is > >>> largely ignored on the grounds that such patents don't apply in all > >>> parts of the world. The current downloads for Hugin barely mention > >>> the patent issue. > > >>> Copyrights are also largely ignored in some parts of the world. Using > >>> the same logic as above, is it ok for someone in one of the parts of > >>> the world that largely ignore copyrights to repackage a version of > >>> Hugin and sell it as their own worldwide? Would it be ok if they did > >>> so and only casually mentioned to the buyer to check their local laws > >>> for any issues that may concern them locally? > > >>> If someone makes a commercial image from Hugin using a SIFT control > >>> point generator and then posts the stitched image on the Internet and > >>> someone copies it, is that ok? > > >>> I'll duck now. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx
Re: [hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions
Patents hold no ground in Europe. The Berne convention can still be applied, what ever the licence you choose for your image. And to DaveN comment, I ain't infringing any patent while located in Europe, so the moralistic opinion is bogus, but copyright laws can still be applied in Europe. -- Yves Tennevin / esby free.fr http://esby.free.fr/contact.html DaveN wrote: > Sure the IP rights are separate but that was not the question. If you > create an image infringing on a patent, can you in all honesty be > outraged if someone infringes on your rights to your image? > > On Dec 17, 12:39 am, ArAgost wrote: > >> IANAL and I'm no expert on patents, but note that whatever are the >> issues with the software, the intellectual property of the image is >> completely separate. >> >> On 17 Dic, 06:30, DaveN wrote: >> >> >>> The best control point generators out there are SIFT based (or the >>> software company doesn't tell you what the function is but it sure >>> seems to operate like SIFT). SIFT is patented however that patent is >>> largely ignored on the grounds that such patents don't apply in all >>> parts of the world. The current downloads for Hugin barely mention >>> the patent issue. >>> >>> Copyrights are also largely ignored in some parts of the world. Using >>> the same logic as above, is it ok for someone in one of the parts of >>> the world that largely ignore copyrights to repackage a version of >>> Hugin and sell it as their own worldwide? Would it be ok if they did >>> so and only casually mentioned to the buyer to check their local laws >>> for any issues that may concern them locally? >>> >>> If someone makes a commercial image from Hugin using a SIFT control >>> point generator and then posts the stitched image on the Internet and >>> someone copies it, is that ok? >>> >>> I'll duck now. >>> > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx
[hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions
I think you'll find the answers to your questions in some other forum. -- Bruno On Dec 17, 3:04 pm, DaveN wrote: > Sure the IP rights are separate but that was not the question. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx
[hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions
Sure the IP rights are separate but that was not the question. If you create an image infringing on a patent, can you in all honesty be outraged if someone infringes on your rights to your image? On Dec 17, 12:39 am, ArAgost wrote: > IANAL and I'm no expert on patents, but note that whatever are the > issues with the software, the intellectual property of the image is > completely separate. > > On 17 Dic, 06:30, DaveN wrote: > > > The best control point generators out there are SIFT based (or the > > software company doesn't tell you what the function is but it sure > > seems to operate like SIFT). SIFT is patented however that patent is > > largely ignored on the grounds that such patents don't apply in all > > parts of the world. The current downloads for Hugin barely mention > > the patent issue. > > > Copyrights are also largely ignored in some parts of the world. Using > > the same logic as above, is it ok for someone in one of the parts of > > the world that largely ignore copyrights to repackage a version of > > Hugin and sell it as their own worldwide? Would it be ok if they did > > so and only casually mentioned to the buyer to check their local laws > > for any issues that may concern them locally? > > > If someone makes a commercial image from Hugin using a SIFT control > > point generator and then posts the stitched image on the Internet and > > someone copies it, is that ok? > > > I'll duck now. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx
[hugin-ptx] Re: Moral questions
IANAL and I'm no expert on patents, but note that whatever are the issues with the software, the intellectual property of the image is completely separate. On 17 Dic, 06:30, DaveN wrote: > The best control point generators out there are SIFT based (or the > software company doesn't tell you what the function is but it sure > seems to operate like SIFT). SIFT is patented however that patent is > largely ignored on the grounds that such patents don't apply in all > parts of the world. The current downloads for Hugin barely mention > the patent issue. > > Copyrights are also largely ignored in some parts of the world. Using > the same logic as above, is it ok for someone in one of the parts of > the world that largely ignore copyrights to repackage a version of > Hugin and sell it as their own worldwide? Would it be ok if they did > so and only casually mentioned to the buyer to check their local laws > for any issues that may concern them locally? > > If someone makes a commercial image from Hugin using a SIFT control > point generator and then posts the stitched image on the Internet and > someone copies it, is that ok? > > I'll duck now. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hugin and other free panoramic software" group. A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ To post to this group, send email to hugin-ptx@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hugin-ptx+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx
