Since I've no response of ftp team, I plan to close this bug soon if nobody
has new arguments against this.
--
Florent
pgpOVy9be86Kx.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Le Vendredi 12 Août 2005 07:21, Steve Langasek a écrit :
> > On Thu, Aug 11, 2005 at 03:24:45PM +0200, Florent Bayle wrote:
> > > Le Samedi 6 Août 2005 06:40, Steve Langasek a écrit :
> > > Hi Florent,
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jun 22, 2005 at 06:28:54AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Jun 2
On Thu, Aug 11, 2005 at 03:24:45PM +0200, Florent Bayle wrote:
> Le Samedi 6 Août 2005 06:40, Steve Langasek a écrit :
> [...]
> > > Well, if the prior art exists which shows the patent is invalid, I'm
> > > personally satisfied that we can ship it, but this is actually the
> > > purview of the ft
Le Samedi 6 Août 2005 06:40, Steve Langasek a écrit :
> Hi Florent,
Hi Steve,
[...]
> > Well, if the prior art exists which shows the patent is invalid, I'm
> > personally satisfied that we can ship it, but this is actually the
> > purview of the ftp team to decide.
>
> Is this bug still being hel
Hi Florent,
On Wed, Jun 22, 2005 at 06:28:54AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 22, 2005 at 03:25:22AM +0200, Florent Bayle wrote:
> > Le Mercredi 22 Juin 2005 02:38, Steve Langasek a écrit :
> > [...]
> > > > You should not remove wontfix tag, it's maintainer role to decide if he
> > >
On Wed, Jun 22, 2005 at 03:25:22AM +0200, Florent Bayle wrote:
> Le Mercredi 22 Juin 2005 02:38, Steve Langasek a écrit :
> [...]
> > > You should not remove wontfix tag, it's maintainer role to decide if he
> > > will fix the bug or not.
> > The "wontfix" tag isn't really appropriate for an RC bu
On Wednesday 22 June 2005 03.25, Florent Bayle wrote:
[libpano12]
> http://www.virtualproperties.com/noipix/patents.html suggests that there
> is clear prior art in this case. I have taken this link from previous
> discution on debian-legal. But Robert Jordens thinks that :
> "The prior art argumen
The senior patent holder is presumably now Ford Oxaal, who discusses
his licensing policy, his relationship to iPIX, and the status of
Helmut Dersch's "PT toolset" at
http://www.pictosphere.com/kwx/faq.html .
I have made no attempt to evaluate the strength of his patents in
light of the prior art,
Le Mercredi 22 Juin 2005 02:38, Steve Langasek a écrit :
[...]
> > You should not remove wontfix tag, it's maintainer role to decide if he
> > will fix the bug or not.
>
> The "wontfix" tag isn't really appropriate for an RC bug, however -- either
> it gets fixed, or the package gets removed.
>
Ye
On Tue, Jun 21, 2005 at 08:03:48PM +0200, Florent Bayle wrote:
> Le Mardi 21 Juin 2005 18:10, Robert Jordens a écrit :
> > severity 309257 grave
> > tags 309257 - wontfix
> > tags 309257 + sid etch
> > thanks
> You should not remove wontfix tag, it's maintainer role to decide if he will
> fix the
Le Mardi 21 Juin 2005 18:10, Robert Jordens a écrit :
> severity 309257 grave
> tags 309257 - wontfix
> tags 309257 + sid etch
> thanks
>
You should not remove wontfix tag, it's maintainer role to decide if he will
fix the bug or not.
>
> Hey!
>
> * Florent Bayle:
> > severity 309257 important
>
severity 309257 grave
tags 309257 - wontfix
tags 309257 + sid etch
thanks
Hey!
* Florent Bayle:
> severity 309257 important
> tags 309257 wontfix
> stop
> This bug should not prevent libpano12 from going into testing.
Patent problems are not something that you can refuse to fix! And how do
yo
Le lundi 16 mai 2005 à 20:33 +0200, Josselin Mouette a écrit :
> So what? Are we going to remove any piece of software for which a
> jackass claims he has some prior art?
I meant "some patent", of course.
--
.''`. Josselin Mouette/\./\
: :' : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
`. `'
Le lundi 16 mai 2005 à 12:12 +0200, Robert Jordens a écrit :
> For a user or for Debian we can't knowingly risk lawsuits even if we
> think they can be won.
So what? Are we going to remove any piece of software for which a
jackass claims he has some prior art?
Come on, please resurrect the non-us
Hello!
[Mon, 16 May 2005] MJ Ray wrote:
> Read more about the iPIX vs Dersch from FFII at
> http://swpat.ffii.org/pikta/xrani/ipix/
>
> The second link (contains patent titles) suggests that there
> is clear prior art.
Thanks for the link!
The prior art argument is pretty much irrelevant in our
Read more about the iPIX vs Dersch from FFII at
http://swpat.ffii.org/pikta/xrani/ipix/
The second link (contains patent titles) suggests that there
is clear prior art.
Interactive Pictures appear to be a tn.us corporation - does anyone
nearby know whether any regulations forbid so-called patent
Package: libpano12
Version: 2.7.0.9-1
Severity: serious
As has been pointed out multiple times in the ITP (obviously noone read
it...) for panotools
(http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=251617), the original
author of panotools/libpano, Helmut Dersch has been forced by patent
lawsuits
17 matches
Mail list logo
