Re: Ghostscript Licence
email@example.com (joost witteveen) wrote on 21.03.96 in <m0tzjRi-00010aC@rulcmc.leidenuniv.nl>:
> If 3.53 should go into non-free, I guess I should release
> 2.62 too (for the base system), and make the 3.53 package
> replace 2.62.
I think we must do it that way, unfortunately. From the license, it seems
when you include even one non-free program on the CD, you have to
negotiate separately for the rights to include gs; that would be a
particular dangerous legal bomb anywhere except in non-free.
Licenses like that one should be shot.
> On another note, the 3.53 (and 2.62) versions of ghostscript
> have no gif support (thanks, compuserve). Maybe that warrants
> a 2.6.1-gif non-free release too? (I don't mean this too seriously).
You misspelt "Unisys". They are the patent holders. They are also the
reason why there is no longer a free compress program (that's the same
Support PNG instead. It's a far more rational format, has some powerful
features GIF misses, uses the same free (and more effective) algorithm as
gzip, has been developed recently on the net, and is even endorsed by
Compuserve as a GIF replacement (well, they falsely claim to have invented
it, but what do you expect). And a RFC for PNG seems to be in the works
(ditto for LZ77, gzip, and zlib or whatever its current name is).