Re: [Devel] Apple patents (was `Some numbers smaller than some others')

[Vincent Caron]

On Wed, 2002-06-19 at 21:50, Sebastien BARRE wrote:
> I mean, we will redistribute Freetype inside VTK 
> (http://www.visualizationtoolkit.org/), which is OpenSource. Still, what 
> would allow us to enable it ? I'm confused by that issue.

I must admit I'm a bit confused myself. I'm wondering if the restriction
apply when redistributing source code implementing a patented process,
when actively choosing to use the patented process or not a compile
time, or when using the resulting binary code. Since the patented
TrueType instructions are still present in FT2's source code, I wonder
how a macro can remove the patent restriction.

Seeing Mandrake's or RedHat's RPMs of FreeType compiled with the
TrueType bytecode interpreter, I could only think they purchased a
license from Apple. However Debian also ships FreeType compiled with the
bytecode interpreter, and they have a definitively clear policy against
patents.

It seems that Apple is just plainly tolerant for now, we are evidently
an important figure of people using FreeType and the full bytecode
interpreter without paying a fee to them. However, as said in FreeType's
'patent issue' page, they enjoy new revenues thru licensing and can't be
unhappy about TrueType technology being available everywhere for
everyone.