17 messages in org.apache.legal-discussRE: CMaps for PDF CJK Fonts (LEGAL-36)| From | Sent On | Attachments |
|---|---|---|
| Henri Yandell | Oct 5, 2008 11:26 pm | |
| Geir Magnusson Jr. | Oct 6, 2008 2:33 am | |
| Henri Yandell | Oct 6, 2008 1:27 pm | |
| Jukka Zitting | Oct 6, 2008 2:22 pm | |
| Lawrence Rosen | Oct 6, 2008 3:54 pm | |
| Geir Magnusson Jr. | Oct 6, 2008 8:43 pm | |
| Henri Yandell | Oct 6, 2008 9:37 pm | |
| Henri Yandell | Oct 6, 2008 9:44 pm | |
| William A. Rowe, Jr. | Oct 7, 2008 12:13 am | |
| Jukka Zitting | Oct 7, 2008 12:46 am | |
| Lawrence Rosen | Oct 7, 2008 10:53 am | |
| Jukka Zitting | Oct 10, 2008 5:07 pm | |
| Lawrence Rosen | Oct 10, 2008 5:42 pm | |
| Henri Yandell | Oct 12, 2008 5:26 pm | |
| Jukka Zitting | Oct 13, 2008 2:55 am | |
| Jukka Zitting | Nov 27, 2008 3:21 pm | |
| Jukka Zitting | Dec 3, 2008 2:16 pm |
| Subject: | RE: CMaps for PDF CJK Fonts (LEGAL-36) | |
|---|---|---|
| From: | Lawrence Rosen (lro...@rosenlaw.com) | |
| Date: | Oct 10, 2008 5:42:11 pm | |
| List: | org.apache.legal-discuss | |
Lets take Adobe at their word, and that there are patents pending. Further, lets leap to a pragmatic conclusion that the patents that are pending read on this code.
Should this change how we think about this?
Yes. Now I'm worried.
How should we proceed here?
Due diligence: Try to identify those patents. Ask Adobe about them. Ask Adobe if they will broaden their license(s) to include what we need. If not, try to avoid infringing their (hypothetical) patents to the best of your ability and with as much as you know. If you think Adobe is not disclosing enough and you remain worried, don't implement in this area. I can't judge the importance of this technology to Apache, only you software experts can. If it is very important, and if you still don't know much after inquiry, raise this question again and we'll talk some more.
/Larry
P.S. Just because I know some of you are paranoid about the unknowable, and in time for Halloween, I should put a "Patent Pending" notice on this email. In today's software world that notice is almost like saying "Boo!" Adobe should be nicer than that to Apache. If you ask them, they just may be.
-----Original Message----- From: Jukka Zitting [mailto:jukk...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, October 10, 2008 5:08 PM To: Legal Discuss Subject: Re: CMaps for PDF CJK Fonts (LEGAL-36)
Hi,
On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 7:53 PM, Lawrence Rosen <lro...@rosenlaw.com> wrote:
Lets take Adobe at their word, and that there are patents pending. Further, lets leap to a pragmatic conclusion that the patents that are pending read on this code.
Should this change how we think about this?
Yes. Now I'm worried.
How should we proceed here?
BR,
Jukka Zitting
--------------------------------------------------------------------- DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for official ASF policies and documents.
--------------------------------------------------------------------- DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for official ASF policies and documents.