Re: Flash is open?
On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 3:28 PM, Camaleón <noelamac@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 14 May 2010 07:32:10 -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
>
>> On 05/14/2010 07:04 AM, Camaleón wrote:
>
>>>> 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?
Yes. "Developers are now free to implement what is documented in the
specifications without restrictions from Adobe."
I think you might separate the description of file format (free) and
the code itself (proprietary). So you can write your flash player
using the documentation but you cannot get the code of Adobe Flash
Player.
>>> 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.
Linux, FreeBSD, OSX and other OSs included in that W3C standards? I
think the answer is no... Do you have trust in them?
Bye,
a
Reply to: