Re: Flash is open?

[Camaleón <noelamac@gmail.com>]

On Fri, 14 May 2010 07:32:10 -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:

> On 05/14/2010 07:04 AM, Camaleón wrote:

>>> "The SWF file format is available as an open specification ..."
>>
>> I hope that is more than "pretty words" :-)
> 
> Do we say that about the thousands of RFCs written by people at
> companies?

No, as long as those companies provide a clear licence for their products/
software/developments.

>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_specifications
>>>
>>> "An open specification is not controlled by a single company or
>>> individual or by a group with discriminatory membership criteria.
>>> Copies of Open Specifications are available free of charge or for a
>>> moderate fee and can be implemented under reasonable and non
>>> discriminatory licensing (RAND) terms by all interested parties."
>>
>> So that means...?
>>
>> a/ That I can modify the code of Flash without any fear of Adobe being
>> suing me :-)
> 
> Pay attention, for God's sake!
> 
> Their *code* is proprietary, their file specs are not.

Sorry, but IANAL. "Proprietary code" is what we (linux community) avoid 
the most, so, what I am missing here?

Or put in another words, what "code" are you referring to?

The question is still unanswered. 

Can we (we=people) make our own Flash implementation by using Adobe Flash 
specs?

>> b/ That I can "read" and "use" their specs, but nothing more.
>>
>> "b" option is not very good for a FLOSS community :-/
> 
> Give it a rest already.

Uh? :-?
 
>> Sorry, but I do cannot fully trust Adobe nor any company behind a
>> product with such "terse" license model...
> 
> No one is holding your feet to the fire while simultaneously
> waterboarding you, saying "Trust Adobe!!"

Oh, no, but... If W3C does not trust "Flash" technology to be included as 
one of their recommended standards, why should I? That is the point.

Do you trust Mono? Hey, it has a dual license (GPL2/LGPL2), is an ECMA 
standard and MS has claimed under their "Community Promise" that they 
won't go againts developers/developments that make, use, sell... or 
distributes any covered implementation under any type of development/
distribution model, including open-source licensing models.

That words "sounds" and "reads" nice (like that "open specification" of 
Adobe), but I would avoid the use of Mono as much as I can. The same goes 
for Flash technology.

Greetings,

-- 
Camaleón