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 #27714 is a reply to message #27667]

Fri, 02 November 2001 07:26

Dennis Boccippio
Messages: 23
Registered: July 2000

Junior Member

In article <slrn9u2tmu.ffk.nobody@pooh.nrel.gov>,
nobody@nowhere.com (Steve Smith<steven_smith>) wrote:

>> 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.

Either way, it's not something I care to reward. If they were oblivious
to the use, they missed out on one of the biggest innovations in recent
memory (the Unisys patent FUD, IIRC, popped up a couple of years after
the introduction of the WWW, when GIF was already a de-facto standard -
remember when even JPGs broke browsers?), and that doesn't exactly seems
to be corporate behavior worth rewarding. If they knew about the
unauthorized use and were _allowing_ it to become a de-facto standard
before raising the FUD, it was a pure bait-and-switch, certainly not
behavior worth reporting.

Either way, they declined or neglected to protect their own interests
early on. Perfectly within their right (I would assume, deference given
to people who actually know patent law), but not something I'm overly
impressed by or overly inclined to reward.... MHO only...

> 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.

Agreed.

- DJB

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 06:29:57 PDT 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.24426 seconds