comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive: archive

Home » Public Forums » archive » gif license

Show: Today's Messages :: Show Polls :: Message Navigator
E-mail to friend

Re: gif license [message #27746 is a reply to message #27667]

Thu, 01 November 2001 08:25

nobody@nowhere.com (S is currently offline

nobody@nowhere.com (S
Messages: 55
Registered: July 2001

Member

On Wed, 31 Oct 2001 21:46:01 -0500, Dennis Boccippio <djboccip@hotmail.com>
wrote:
> In article <slrn9u07p6.cht.nobody@pooh.nrel.gov>,
> nobody@nowhere.com (Steve Smith<steven_smith>) wrote:
>
>
>>
>> I am wondering the following: since IDL is an interpretive langauage, i.e. you
>> cannot make standalone programs, then any potential user of code you may give
>> out would have an IDL license, and presumably would not have the GIF/LZW
>> enabled if they had not contacted Unisys and secured a license. So where is
>> the problem? It would seem to me that your code would be useless to anyone
>> without this license, am I correct? So I don't see how distributing your code
>> is a problem (you are NOT distributing the ability to read/write GIF).
>
>
> Seems logical; the portions of the apps with GIF export functionality
> would be useless, although I'm not sure that would immunize us against
> some hypothetical Unisys action, given the language of the agreement.
> Actually, that raises a question - we haven't yet upgraded from 5.3
> (because of the GIF issue and legacy code). How does 5.4+ IDL handle
> READ_GIF/WRITE_GIF? Do they fail to compile? Or simply perform
> nothing unless activated?
>
> Personally, I'm torn on the LZW issue. On one hand, I think it's
> perfectly reasonable to protect intellectual property, on the other
> hand, I'm still peeved over U's handling of the issue several years
> back, which smacked of a bait-and-switch, and doesn't seem corporate
> behavior worth rewarding...
>
> - DJB
>

Maybe you know something I don't, but I recently posted a link to an article
about the history of the LZW/GIF issue. From that article, I gathered that LZW
was used by many (like Compuserve) without permission and that Unisys was
either oblivious or didn't care about it till some time later. It doesn't sound
like it was an intentional act aimed at proliferating LZW by giving it away. I
think what's really disturbing is that in the present situation, nobody knows
if what they are doing is legal until they've had a long consultation with
Unisys and secured a license.

--
Steve S.

steve@NOSPAMmailaps.org
remove NOSPAM before replying

Report message to a moderator

[Message index]

		gif license By: Michael L. Kaiser on Mon, 29 October 2001 12:21
		Re: gif license By: Dennis Boccippio on Fri, 02 November 2001 07:18
		Re: gif license By: Dennis Boccippio on Fri, 02 November 2001 07:16
		Re: gif license By: Dennis Boccippio on Fri, 02 November 2001 07:26
		Re: gif license By: Craig Markwardt on Thu, 01 November 2001 21:35
		Re: gif license By: David Fanning on Thu, 01 November 2001 13:53
		Re: gif license By: nobody@nowhere.com (S on Thu, 01 November 2001 08:25
		Re: gif license By: Craig Markwardt on Wed, 31 October 2001 21:22
		Re: gif license By: Dennis Boccippio on Wed, 31 October 2001 18:46
		Re: gif license By: David Fanning on Wed, 31 October 2001 08:17
		Re: gif license By: nobody@nowhere.com (S on Wed, 31 October 2001 07:59

Previous Topic:	LINK : warning LNK4068: /MACHINE not specified; defaulting to IX86
Next Topic:	Re: Creating pointer in structure

-=] Back to Top [=-

[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [

] [

]

Current Time: Fri Oct 10 11:40:21 PDT 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.63834 seconds