[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Attribution-ShareAlike License



On Thu, 11 Sep 2003 12:25:03 -0500
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> wrote:
> > Are you being sarcastic, pointing out the vagueness of the terms?
> > Many people edit PDFs directly (myself included on occasion).
> 
> 	As have I, but I have had to resort to using non free tools on
>  a non free OS to do so. Are you aware of free software that would
>  allow me to directly edit PDF files?  If not, then Florian may have a
>  point. 

There are a number of tools that convert PDF into a more workable
format, and an equal number of tools which can convert to PDF. I use
pdf2ps and ps2pdf, myself. (Note here that in the case of my resume, PDF
was at one time my source format. I used these tools :)

KWord can at least open PDF files, I don't know if it's able to save
them as such.

However, I'm not one who believes that just because a file format only
has non-Free editor implementations that the file format itself is
non-Free. There are many ways one can edit PDFs with Free tools, but
this is beside the point for me. It's not (to my knowledge)
patent-encumbered, and Adobe hasn't (to my knowledge) attempted to stop
anybody who has written those tools that manipulate PDFs.

If I develop a really spiffy document format for, say, a braille
machine, document it thoroughly and publish it, and either don't take
any patents out of it, or file one of those
strictly-prior-art-to-stop-somebody-else-from-patenting-it patents, but
my own implementation of the tools are non-Free, I don't want the file
format itself to be considered non-Free. The ability to create a Free
editor exists. No licensing fees, no patent battles, nothing.

Attachment: pgpy0RiJK1hCE.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: