Hi, guys:
This just reached a critical "must-express" pressure in my head: I've been periodically, over the last few years, missing this (yet non-existent?) feature for a dropper, in Inkscape (as well as in other image editors). An enhanced version of a dropper, which does the following:
It's able to "suck up" the attributes of an object (similar to what it's already doing), and then "drip them out" onto one OR MORE (multiple!) objects, as the user wishes. The sampled (sucked up) attributes could stay in the dropper buffer, indefinitely... until the user replaces them with another dropper "suction".
In addition, it would be nice to expand the number of attribute types the dropper can disperse, and, of course, let the user check/uncheck the attributes that are being copied and dispersed.
[x] fill [x] stroke color [x] stroke thickness - absolute units [x] stroke thickness - proportional/adjusted to the transform magnification (not sure about this one, just a thought) [x] opacity [x] alpha [x] a variety of other attributes, like roundness, etc. (limited to certain objects, perhaps) [x] funky, crazy user-assigned things, like "reduce to same number of nodes" -- OK, maybe i'm going too far here... [x] I might be missing many many other great additions to this list; i'm sure others would suggest more stuff.
------------------
So... with this superdropper I'd be able to click on a path/object, and then, holding down some drip/endow control key combo (like, "Ctrl+Alt[+click]", or some such) click on object(s) TO WHICH I WOULD PASS these attributes — as many objects as I like, in succession..., without re-sampling (without sucking in attributes)
-------------------
It seems like code-wise, it shouldn't be that difficult.
--------------------
I was checking out the 0.48 dropper, and it is already capable of copying either the stroke color or the fill color, distinctly, and there's already a button tool bar to go with it. (But it doesn't seem to be able to do a series of "drip-outs" onto many objects.)
--------------------
As far as I know this is my original idea, and I'd like to "bequeath" it to Inkscape and other GPL-licensed applications. So, just to be sure no commercial app hijacks this feature (the concept/algorithm) and claims it as its own (and prevents open-source apps from acquiring it), I hereby declare the afore-mentioned feature to be under the GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE, v3, as spelled out by the Free Software Foundation.
Again, this is just in case it hasn't been developed yet, although i'm actually hard-pressed to believe that it doesn't yet exist somewhere, and in case there's a looming threat of some commercial-venture grabbing the feature before it gets integrated into some GPL'ed app (hopefully into Inkscape)
------------------------------
Thanks!
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 5:11 PM, Bric <bric@...2538...> wrote:
As far as I know this is my original idea, and I'd like to "bequeath" it to Inkscape and other GPL-licensed applications. So, just to be sure no commercial app hijacks this feature (the concept/algorithm) and claims it as its own (and prevents open-source apps from acquiring it), I hereby declare the afore-mentioned feature to be under the GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE, v3, as spelled out by the Free Software Foundation.
Again, this is just in case it hasn't been developed yet, although i'm actually hard-pressed to believe that it doesn't yet exist somewhere, and in case there's a looming threat of some commercial-venture grabbing the feature before it gets integrated into some GPL'ed app (hopefully into Inkscape)
Oh boy! Software licenses apply to copyrighted code implementations, not to ideas for features... Only a software patent would restrict the implementability of an idea. And I don't think it's wise to prohibit someone to implement something.
Felipe
Please file a "bug report" (wishlist item) for any feature requests.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/inkscape/+filebug
Cheers, Josh
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 1:11 PM, Bric <bric@...2538...> wrote:
Hi, guys:
This just reached a critical "must-express" pressure in my head: I've been periodically, over the last few years, missing this (yet non-existent?) feature for a dropper, in Inkscape (as well as in other image editors). An enhanced version of a dropper, which does the following:
It's able to "suck up" the attributes of an object (similar to what it's already doing), and then "drip them out" onto one OR MORE (multiple!) objects, as the user wishes. The sampled (sucked up) attributes could stay in the dropper buffer, indefinitely... until the user replaces them with another dropper "suction".
In addition, it would be nice to expand the number of attribute types the dropper can disperse, and, of course, let the user check/uncheck the attributes that are being copied and dispersed.
[x] fill [x] stroke color [x] stroke thickness - absolute units [x] stroke thickness - proportional/adjusted to the transform magnification (not sure about this one, just a thought) [x] opacity [x] alpha [x] a variety of other attributes, like roundness, etc. (limited to certain objects, perhaps) [x] funky, crazy user-assigned things, like "reduce to same number of nodes" -- OK, maybe i'm going too far here... [x] I might be missing many many other great additions to this list; i'm sure others would suggest more stuff.
So... with this superdropper I'd be able to click on a path/object, and then, holding down some drip/endow control key combo (like, "Ctrl+Alt[+click]", or some such) click on object(s) TO WHICH I WOULD PASS these attributes — as many objects as I like, in succession..., without re-sampling (without sucking in attributes)
It seems like code-wise, it shouldn't be that difficult.
I was checking out the 0.48 dropper, and it is already capable of copying either the stroke color or the fill color, distinctly, and there's already a button tool bar to go with it. (But it doesn't seem to be able to do a series of "drip-outs" onto many objects.)
As far as I know this is my original idea, and I'd like to "bequeath" it to Inkscape and other GPL-licensed applications. So, just to be sure no commercial app hijacks this feature (the concept/algorithm) and claims it as its own (and prevents open-source apps from acquiring it), I hereby declare the afore-mentioned feature to be under the GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE, v3, as spelled out by the Free Software Foundation.
Again, this is just in case it hasn't been developed yet, although i'm actually hard-pressed to believe that it doesn't yet exist somewhere, and in case there's a looming threat of some commercial-venture grabbing the feature before it gets integrated into some GPL'ed app (hopefully into Inkscape)
Thanks!
Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_mar _______________________________________________ Inkscape-devel mailing list Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
On March 22, 2013 at 5:03 PM Felipe Sanches <juca@...2270...> wrote:
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 5:11 PM, Bric <bric@...2538...> wrote:
As far as I know this is my original idea, and I'd like to "bequeath" it to Inkscape and other GPL-licensed applications. So, just to be sure no commercial app hijacks this feature (the concept/algorithm) and claims it as its own (and prevents open-source apps from acquiring it), I hereby declare the afore-mentioned feature to be under the GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE, v3, as spelled out by the Free Software Foundation.
Again, this is just in case it hasn't been developed yet, although i'm actually hard-pressed to believe that it doesn't yet exist somewhere, and in case there's a looming threat of some commercial-venture grabbing the feature before it gets integrated into some GPL'ed app (hopefully into Inkscape)
Oh boy! Software licenses apply to copyrighted code implementations, not to ideas for features... Only a software patent would restrict the implementability of an idea. And I don't think it's wise to prohibit someone to implement something.
The GPL doesn't prohibit anything except one thing: prohibiting.
It's the one paradoxical exception - prohibit to prohibit. (I think that's the distinct essence of the GPL concept)
Similar to "tolerance and intolerance". If we posit that "tolerance" is a good thing, and should be maximized, then the only thing not to tolerate is intolerance.
If you read my original post, I say: just in case some commercial venture grabs the feature and precludes everyone else from using it.
I attended POSSCON 2012, and sat in on John Hall's lecture on copyright and GPL: copyright and patent warfare is no legal joke, and is being waged in full throttle.
Also approached him after the lecture and further asked him for explanations of it all — alas, one needs to be on guard against being blind-sided by unfair practices. Yes, a concept and an algorithm can be copyrighted. Perhaps THIS concept is relatively too trivial and easy for anyone to bother. But I just wanted to be sure it is dedicated to GPL, as it would thus be SHAREABLE BY ALL. Might be trivial code-wise, but it would be tremendous time saver for certain inkscape tasks, and might even facilitate new creative moves.
Felipe
An actual implementation of a feature is copyrightable. A mere idea for a feature is not.
Felipe
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 6:56 PM, Bric <bric@...2538...> wrote:
On March 22, 2013 at 5:03 PM Felipe Sanches <juca@...2270...> wrote:
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 5:11 PM, Bric <bric@...2538...> wrote:
As far as I know this is my original idea, and I'd like to "bequeath" it to Inkscape and other GPL-licensed applications. So, just to be sure no commercial app hijacks this feature (the concept/algorithm) and claims it as its own (and prevents open-source apps from acquiring it), I hereby declare the afore-mentioned feature to be under the GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE, v3, as spelled out by the Free Software Foundation.
Again, this is just in case it hasn't been developed yet, although i'm actually hard-pressed to believe that it doesn't yet exist somewhere, and in case there's a looming threat of some commercial-venture grabbing the feature before it gets integrated into some GPL'ed app (hopefully into Inkscape)
Oh boy! Software licenses apply to copyrighted code implementations, not to ideas for features... Only a software patent would restrict the implementability of an idea. And I don't think it's wise to prohibit someone to implement something.
The GPL doesn't prohibit anything except one thing: prohibiting.
It's the one paradoxical exception - prohibit to prohibit. (I think that's the distinct essence of the GPL concept)
Similar to "tolerance and intolerance". If we posit that "tolerance" is a good thing, and should be maximized, then the only thing not to tolerate is intolerance.
If you read my original post, I say: just in case some commercial venture grabs the feature and precludes everyone else from using it.
I attended POSSCON 2012, and sat in on John Hall's lecture on copyright and GPL: copyright and patent warfare is no legal joke, and is being waged in full throttle.
Also approached him after the lecture and further asked him for explanations of it all — alas, one needs to be on guard against being blind-sided by unfair practices. Yes, a concept and an algorithm can be copyrighted. Perhaps THIS concept is relatively too trivial and easy for anyone to bother. But I just wanted to be sure it is dedicated to GPL, as it would thus be SHAREABLE BY ALL. Might be trivial code-wise, but it would be tremendous time saver for certain inkscape tasks, and might even facilitate new creative moves.
Felipe
Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_mar _______________________________________________ Inkscape-devel mailing list Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
On March 22, 2013 at 6:24 PM Felipe Sanches <juca@...2270...> wrote:
An actual implementation of a feature is copyrightable. A mere idea for a feature is not.
Your source for this?
Felipe
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 6:56 PM, Bric <bric@...2538...> wrote:
On March 22, 2013 at 5:03 PM Felipe Sanches <juca@...2270...> wrote:
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 5:11 PM, Bric <bric@...2538...> wrote:
As far as I know this is my original idea, and I'd like to "bequeath" it to Inkscape and other GPL-licensed applications. So, just to be sure no commercial app hijacks this feature (the concept/algorithm) and claims it as its own (and prevents open-source apps from acquiring it), I hereby declare the afore-mentioned feature to be under the GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE, v3, as spelled out by the Free Software Foundation.
Again, this is just in case it hasn't been developed yet, although i'm actually hard-pressed to believe that it doesn't yet exist somewhere, and in case there's a looming threat of some commercial-venture grabbing the feature before it gets integrated into some GPL'ed app (hopefully into Inkscape)
Oh boy! Software licenses apply to copyrighted code implementations, not to ideas for features... Only a software patent would restrict the implementability of an idea. And I don't think it's wise to prohibit someone to implement something.
The GPL doesn't prohibit anything except one thing: prohibiting.
It's the one paradoxical exception - prohibit to prohibit. (I think that's the distinct essence of the GPL concept)
Similar to "tolerance and intolerance". If we posit that "tolerance" is a good thing, and should be maximized, then the only thing not to tolerate is intolerance.
If you read my original post, I say: just in case some commercial venture grabs the feature and precludes everyone else from using it.
I attended POSSCON 2012, and sat in on John Hall's lecture on copyright and GPL: copyright and patent warfare is no legal joke, and is being waged in full throttle.
Also approached him after the lecture and further asked him for explanations of it all — alas, one needs to be on guard against being blind-sided by unfair practices. Yes, a concept and an algorithm can be copyrighted. Perhaps THIS concept is relatively too trivial and easy for anyone to bother. But I just wanted to be sure it is dedicated to GPL, as it would thus be SHAREABLE BY ALL. Might be trivial code-wise, but it would be tremendous time saver for certain inkscape tasks, and might even facilitate new creative moves.
Felipe
Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_mar _______________________________________________ Inkscape-devel mailing list Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
The text of the United States copyright law...
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 7:28 PM, Bric <bric@...2538...> wrote:
On March 22, 2013 at 6:24 PM Felipe Sanches <juca@...2270...> wrote:
An actual implementation of a feature is copyrightable. A mere idea for a feature is not.
Your source for this?
Felipe
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 6:56 PM, Bric <bric@...2538...> wrote:
On March 22, 2013 at 5:03 PM Felipe Sanches <juca@...2270...> wrote:
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 5:11 PM, Bric <bric@...2538...> wrote:
As far as I know this is my original idea, and I'd like to "bequeath" it to Inkscape and other GPL-licensed applications. So, just to be sure no commercial app hijacks this feature (the concept/algorithm) and claims it as its own (and prevents open-source apps from acquiring it), I hereby declare the afore-mentioned feature to be under the GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE, v3, as spelled out by the Free Software Foundation.
Again, this is just in case it hasn't been developed yet, although i'm actually hard-pressed to believe that it doesn't yet exist somewhere, and in case there's a looming threat of some commercial-venture grabbing the feature before it gets integrated into some GPL'ed app (hopefully into Inkscape)
Oh boy! Software licenses apply to copyrighted code implementations, not to ideas for features... Only a software patent would restrict the implementability of an idea. And I don't think it's wise to prohibit someone to implement something.
The GPL doesn't prohibit anything except one thing: prohibiting.
It's the one paradoxical exception - prohibit to prohibit. (I think that's the distinct essence of the GPL concept)
Similar to "tolerance and intolerance". If we posit that "tolerance" is a good thing, and should be maximized, then the only thing not to tolerate is intolerance.
If you read my original post, I say: just in case some commercial venture grabs the feature and precludes everyone else from using it.
I attended POSSCON 2012, and sat in on John Hall's lecture on copyright and GPL: copyright and patent warfare is no legal joke, and is being waged in full throttle.
Also approached him after the lecture and further asked him for explanations of it all — alas, one needs to be on guard against being blind-sided by unfair practices. Yes, a concept and an algorithm can be copyrighted. Perhaps THIS concept is relatively too trivial and easy for anyone to bother. But I just wanted to be sure it is dedicated to GPL, as it would thus be SHAREABLE BY ALL. Might be trivial code-wise, but it would be tremendous time saver for certain inkscape tasks, and might even facilitate new creative moves.
Felipe
Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_mar _______________________________________________ Inkscape-devel mailing list Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
Hi Bric,
Here's from the copyright office's FAQ: http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-general.html#protect
Cheers, Josh
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 3:28 PM, Bric <bric@...2538...> wrote:
On March 22, 2013 at 6:24 PM Felipe Sanches <juca@...2270...> wrote:
An actual implementation of a feature is copyrightable. A mere idea for a feature is not.
Your source for this?
Felipe
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 6:56 PM, Bric <bric@...2538...> wrote:
On March 22, 2013 at 5:03 PM Felipe Sanches <juca@...2270...> wrote:
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 5:11 PM, Bric <bric@...2538...> wrote:
As far as I know this is my original idea, and I'd like to "bequeath" it to Inkscape and other GPL-licensed applications. So, just to be sure no commercial app hijacks this feature (the concept/algorithm) and claims it as its own (and prevents open-source apps from acquiring it), I hereby declare the afore-mentioned feature to be under the GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE, v3, as spelled out by the Free Software Foundation.
Again, this is just in case it hasn't been developed yet, although i'm actually hard-pressed to believe that it doesn't yet exist somewhere, and in case there's a looming threat of some commercial-venture grabbing the feature before it gets integrated into some GPL'ed app (hopefully into Inkscape)
Oh boy! Software licenses apply to copyrighted code implementations, not to ideas for features... Only a software patent would restrict the implementability of an idea. And I don't think it's wise to prohibit someone to implement something.
The GPL doesn't prohibit anything except one thing: prohibiting.
It's the one paradoxical exception - prohibit to prohibit. (I think that's the distinct essence of the GPL concept)
Similar to "tolerance and intolerance". If we posit that "tolerance" is a good thing, and should be maximized, then the only thing not to tolerate is intolerance.
If you read my original post, I say: just in case some commercial venture grabs the feature and precludes everyone else from using it.
I attended POSSCON 2012, and sat in on John Hall's lecture on copyright and GPL: copyright and patent warfare is no legal joke, and is being waged in full throttle.
Also approached him after the lecture and further asked him for explanations of it all — alas, one needs to be on guard against being blind-sided by unfair practices. Yes, a concept and an algorithm can be copyrighted. Perhaps THIS concept is relatively too trivial and easy for anyone to bother. But I just wanted to be sure it is dedicated to GPL, as it would thus be SHAREABLE BY ALL. Might be trivial code-wise, but it would be tremendous time saver for certain inkscape tasks, and might even facilitate new creative moves.
Felipe
Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_mar _______________________________________________ Inkscape-devel mailing list Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_mar _______________________________________________ Inkscape-devel mailing list Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
On March 22, 2013 at 6:31 PM Felipe Sanches <juca@...2270...> wrote:
The text of the United States copyright law...
The US Copyright Act of 1979?
Quite outdated. (I mean, think of the computer industry revolution(s) that have happened since!) It doesn't even contain the word "algorithm"; yet, we know, indisputably, that the key ingredient in creating software are the algorithms.
The MP3 format is copyrighted for its algorithm, and not for the particular expression of that algorithm in some particular computer language (i.e., implementation). Using deductive reasoning, and the contrapositive, in particular, (if A then B --> If not B then not A): If it was the particular expression of the algorithm in, say, C code, that was copyrighted, then I'd be free to express that same algorithm in Python. But Im not.
Yes, I know, the above is a simplification, but I think it's an ongoing debate, and your invocation of the 1979 act DOES have merit (of course!) but it's not as simple in the court rooms.
(I don't mean to call for the debate HERE, on this mailing list; that's, obviously, off-topic, or tangential, at best)
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 7:28 PM, Bric <bric@...2538...> wrote:
On March 22, 2013 at 6:24 PM Felipe Sanches <juca@...2270...> wrote:
An actual implementation of a feature is copyrightable. A mere idea for a feature is not.
Your source for this?
Felipe
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 6:56 PM, Bric <bric@...2538...> wrote:
On March 22, 2013 at 5:03 PM Felipe Sanches <juca@...2270...> wrote:
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 5:11 PM, Bric <bric@...2538...> wrote:
As far as I know this is my original idea, and I'd like to "bequeath" it to Inkscape and other GPL-licensed applications. So, just to be sure no commercial app hijacks this feature (the concept/algorithm) and claims it as its own (and prevents open-source apps from acquiring it), I hereby declare the afore-mentioned feature to be under the GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE, v3, as spelled out by the Free Software Foundation.
Again, this is just in case it hasn't been developed yet, although i'm actually hard-pressed to believe that it doesn't yet exist somewhere, and in case there's a looming threat of some commercial-venture grabbing the feature before it gets integrated into some GPL'ed app (hopefully into Inkscape)
Oh boy! Software licenses apply to copyrighted code implementations, not to ideas for features... Only a software patent would restrict the implementability of an idea. And I don't think it's wise to prohibit someone to implement something.
The GPL doesn't prohibit anything except one thing: prohibiting.
It's the one paradoxical exception - prohibit to prohibit. (I think that's the distinct essence of the GPL concept)
Similar to "tolerance and intolerance". If we posit that "tolerance" is a good thing, and should be maximized, then the only thing not to tolerate is intolerance.
If you read my original post, I say: just in case some commercial venture grabs the feature and precludes everyone else from using it.
I attended POSSCON 2012, and sat in on John Hall's lecture on copyright and GPL: copyright and patent warfare is no legal joke, and is being waged in full throttle.
Also approached him after the lecture and further asked him for explanations of it all — alas, one needs to be on guard against being blind-sided by unfair practices. Yes, a concept and an algorithm can be copyrighted. Perhaps THIS concept is relatively too trivial and easy for anyone to bother. But I just wanted to be sure it is dedicated to GPL, as it would thus be SHAREABLE BY ALL. Might be trivial code-wise, but it would be tremendous time saver for certain inkscape tasks, and might even facilitate new creative moves.
Felipe
Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_mar _______________________________________________ Inkscape-devel mailing list Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
well... it's not really offtopic, given we're all working in a free software project that can be directly affected by copyright law.
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 7:57 PM, Bric <bric@...2538...> wrote:
On March 22, 2013 at 6:31 PM Felipe Sanches <juca@...2270...> wrote:
The text of the United States copyright law...
The US Copyright Act of 1979?
Quite outdated. (I mean, think of the computer industry revolution(s) that have happened since!) It doesn't even contain the word "algorithm"; yet, we know, indisputably, that the key ingredient in creating software are the algorithms.
The MP3 format is copyrighted for its algorithm, and not for the particular expression of that algorithm in some particular computer language (i.e., implementation). Using deductive reasoning, and the contrapositive, in particular, (if A then B --> If not B then not A): If it was the particular expression of the algorithm in, say, C code, that was copyrighted, then I'd be free to express that same algorithm in Python. But Im not.
Yes, I know, the above is a simplification, but I think it's an ongoing debate, and your invocation of the 1979 act DOES have merit (of course!) but it's not as simple in the court rooms.
(I don't mean to call for the debate HERE, on this mailing list; that's, obviously, off-topic, or tangential, at best)
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 7:28 PM, Bric <bric@...2538...> wrote:
On March 22, 2013 at 6:24 PM Felipe Sanches <juca@...2270...> wrote:
An actual implementation of a feature is copyrightable. A mere idea for a feature is not.
Your source for this?
Felipe
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 6:56 PM, Bric <bric@...2538...> wrote:
On March 22, 2013 at 5:03 PM Felipe Sanches <juca@...2270...> wrote:
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 5:11 PM, Bric <bric@...2538...> wrote: > -------------------- > > As far as I know this is my original idea, and I'd like to "bequeath" > it > to > Inkscape and other GPL-licensed applications. So, just to be sure no > commercial > app hijacks this feature (the concept/algorithm) and claims it as its > own > (and > prevents open-source apps from acquiring it), I hereby declare the > afore-mentioned feature to be under the GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE, > v3, > as > spelled out by the Free Software Foundation. > > Again, this is just in case it hasn't been developed yet, although i'm > actually > hard-pressed to believe that it doesn't yet exist somewhere, and in > case > there's > a looming threat of some commercial-venture grabbing the feature > before > it > gets > integrated into some GPL'ed app (hopefully into Inkscape) > > ------------------------------
Oh boy! Software licenses apply to copyrighted code implementations, not to ideas for features... Only a software patent would restrict the implementability of an idea. And I don't think it's wise to prohibit someone to implement something.
The GPL doesn't prohibit anything except one thing: prohibiting.
It's the one paradoxical exception - prohibit to prohibit. (I think that's the distinct essence of the GPL concept)
Similar to "tolerance and intolerance". If we posit that "tolerance" is a good thing, and should be maximized, then the only thing not to tolerate is intolerance.
If you read my original post, I say: just in case some commercial venture grabs the feature and precludes everyone else from using it.
I attended POSSCON 2012, and sat in on John Hall's lecture on copyright and GPL: copyright and patent warfare is no legal joke, and is being waged in full throttle.
Also approached him after the lecture and further asked him for explanations of it all — alas, one needs to be on guard against being blind-sided by unfair practices. Yes, a concept and an algorithm can be copyrighted. Perhaps THIS concept is relatively too trivial and easy for anyone to bother. But I just wanted to be sure it is dedicated to GPL, as it would thus be SHAREABLE BY ALL. Might be trivial code-wise, but it would be tremendous time saver for certain inkscape tasks, and might even facilitate new creative moves.
Felipe
Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_mar _______________________________________________ Inkscape-devel mailing list Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 7:57 PM, Bric <bric@...2538...> wrote:
The MP3 format is copyrighted for its algorithm, and not for the particular expression of that algorithm in some particular computer language (i.e., implementation). Using deductive reasoning, and the contrapositive, in particular, (if A then B --> If not B then not A): If it was the particular expression of the algorithm in, say, C code, that was copyrighted, then I'd be free to express that same algorithm in Python. But Im not.
I think you're actually thinking of patent law... the issues with the mp3 algorithm are related to patents, afaict.
On March 22, 2013 at 7:07 PM Felipe Sanches <juca@...2270...> wrote:
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 7:57 PM, Bric <bric@...2538...> wrote:
The MP3 format is copyrighted for its algorithm, and not for the particular expression of that algorithm in some particular computer language (i.e., implementation). Using deductive reasoning, and the contrapositive, in particular, (if A then B --> If not B then not A): If it was the particular expression of the algorithm in, say, C code, that was copyrighted, then I'd be free to express that same algorithm in Python. But Im not.
I think you're actually thinking of patent law... the issues with the mp3 algorithm are related to patents, afaict.
Hmm... I suppose, yes. But to apply the GPL one doesn't need a patent. Where does GPL fall, between copyright and patents? This is why I had the hunch that there's a lot of gray, and room for arbitrary legal decisions, persuasions.
anyhow... someone, hurry! sketch out my "superdropper" in C++, with the already named inkscape objects! :-)) (or would it be in a Python extension?) :-))
Feature request filed: https://bugs.launchpad.net/inkscape/+bug/1159018
See Chapter 2 of the Fairy Use Tail: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJn_jC4FNDo
Copyright applies to a fixed creative work, not ideas or concepts. The GPL is a subset of the copyright law, thus is can never apply to ideas.
And this is right. We don't want ideas to have monopolies, ever. Patents actually apply to an innovative process or invention which is not an idea, no matter how daft the software patents being granted are. Fixing patent law is basically about fixing the freedom of ideas (and maths).
Martin,
On Fri, 2013-03-22 at 19:13 -0400, Bric wrote:
Hmm... I suppose, yes. But to apply the GPL one doesn't need a patent. Where does GPL fall, between copyright and patents? This is why I had the hunch that there's a lot of gray, and room for arbitrary legal decisions, persuasions.
anyhow... someone, hurry! sketch out my "superdropper" in C++, with the already named inkscape objects! :-)) (or would it be in a Python extension?) :-))
Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_mar _______________________________________________ Inkscape-devel mailing list Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
On March 23, 2013 at 3:26 AM Martin Owens <doctormo@...400...> wrote:
See Chapter 2 of the Fairy Use Tail: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJn_jC4FNDo
Copyright applies to a fixed creative work, not ideas or concepts. The GPL is a subset of the copyright law, thus is can never apply to ideas.
"Roger! Copy that!" :-)
The Lifetime+70 years came up frequently at POSSCON 2012 (I mentioned earlier that I attended), but they didn't go into the "Fair Use" (and the "defensible position") too deeply. Seems like the "defensible position" is in keeping with the notion I expressed earlier — that there's some gray area that could require legal argumentation. The youtube clip itself just MIGHT be seen as an attempt to persuade (isn't it, really?).
Probably "derivation" (of the copyright law) would be a more accurate description for the GPL. It's not really a subset of the words used in the copyright law, but rather a derived interpretation thereof.
(a /SEMANTIC/ SUBSET, perhaps, but semantics is precisely what we debate over, day-to-day.)
So, all-in-all, applying our discussions practically, to this situation: Are we concluding that if some software developers who are currently actively developing some commercial product (let's call it, fictitiously, "Gadobey Doolistrator"), lurk around ... I mean, regularly read ... Inkscape mailing lists, and grab an idea for a feature which was first expressed on these mailing lists, and integrate it in their "Doolistrator" BEFORE it's integrated into inkscape -- THEY COULD NOT prevent inkscape developers from implementing the same, subsequently?
Or would the Doolistrator people then have the copyright on the feature, because they beat Inkscape developers to the actual IMPLEMENTATION? (time-wise)
And this is right. We don't want ideas to have monopolies, ever. Patents actually apply to an innovative process or invention which is not an idea, no matter how daft the software patents being granted are. Fixing patent law is basically about fixing the freedom of ideas (and maths).
OK. This is the SECOND time I attempt to respond to a reply that heralds the "anti-monopoly", "anti-prohibition" notion, as if in contradiction to something I said. That is precisely the function of GPL (one of them), and that is precisely the reason I started all this -- to make sure my idea DOES get protected by GPL, which means, protected from being monopolized!!
Martin,
On Fri, 2013-03-22 at 19:13 -0400, Bric wrote:
Hmm... I suppose, yes. But to apply the GPL one doesn't need a patent. Where does GPL fall, between copyright and patents? This is why I had the hunch that there's a lot of gray, and room for arbitrary legal decisions, persuasions.
anyhow... someone, hurry! sketch out my "superdropper" in C++, with the already named inkscape objects! :-)) (or would it be in a Python extension?) :-))
Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_mar _______________________________________________ Inkscape-devel mailing list Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
On Sat, 2013-03-23 at 05:39 -0400, Bric wrote:
Probably "derivation" (of the copyright law) would be a more accurate description for the GPL.
If it were a law signed in by governments, but it's a license which requires the current copyright law to not change in functionality in order to work.
inkscape -- THEY COULD NOT prevent inkscape developers from implementing the same, subsequently?
They could not prevent the idea being spread from Illustrator to Inkscape, even if _they_ came up with it first. We are free to think and consider ideas of which-ever kind or origin we like without fear of persecution.
And this is right. We don't want ideas to have monopolies, ever.
EVER.
protected by GPL, which means, protected from being monopolized!!
Copyleft is the intentional monopoly for the Commons. The GPL provides a way for the commons (which should help everyone) to be the monopoly, it's clever, but it's sure as hell aint the public domain.
Martin,
On March 23, 2013 at 7:02 AM Martin Owens <doctormo@...400...> wrote:
On Sat, 2013-03-23 at 05:39 -0400, Bric wrote:
Probably "derivation" (of the copyright law) would be a more accurate description for the GPL.
I was merely addressing the word "subset", trying to offer a more accurate descriptor than it.
If it were a law signed in by governments, but it's a license which requires the current copyright law to not change in functionality in order to work.
inkscape -- THEY COULD NOT prevent inkscape developers from implementing the same, subsequently?
They could not prevent the idea being spread from Illustrator to Inkscape, even if _they_ came up with it first. We are free to think and consider ideas of which-ever kind or origin we like without fear of persecution.
I hope you are right.
And this is right. We don't want ideas to have monopolies, ever.
EVER.
protected by GPL, which means, protected from being monopolized!!
Copyleft is the intentional monopoly for the Commons. The GPL provides a way for the commons (which should help everyone) to be the monopoly, it's clever, but it's sure as hell aint the public domain.
I'll have to study the distinctions among GPL, CopyLeft, and "Public Domain".
participants (4)
-
Bric -
Felipe Sanches -
Josh Andler -
Martin Owens