[Fsf-friends] Re: PDF issues

[Sayamindu Dasgupta]

On Wed, 2004-09-29 at 13:41 -0700, Anand Babu wrote:
> ,----[ Sandip Bhattacharya <sandip@lug-delhi.org> ]
> | Tathagata Banerjee wrote:
> | > cumbersome for sustained use. dipankar das's book was created
> | > using microsoft office on microsoft windows, and pdf-ed directly
> | > from there because the fonts were windows-specific. this is the
> | > problem that faces us now - whether we should own up to this or
> | > not.
> | 
> | I think there is no shame in mentioning the method in which the book
> | was created. Bengali (and other Indic scripts) are at a transitional
> | stage in Freedom.
> | 
> | Just as the initial Free tools were created on non-free platforms
> | till they became "self-hosting", I think the use of non-free
> | document creation tools is perfectly ok as long as we have a public
> | plan or intention to move toward Free tools as and when that
> | happens.
> `----
> I agree with both Ramanraj's and Sandip's feedback.
> 
> I think ripping of tags or signatures inserted by non-free programs to
> disguise its creation method only makes our situation worse. Its like
> ostriches sticking their heads in the sand.
> 
> By keeping this info public, We will always be under the pressure that
> there are still non-free programs thats requires a free replacement.
> 
> This book and its source are free, except it has dependencies on
> non-free software. Just like GNU programs initially required non-free
> Unix kernels till we had our own.
> 
> But to publish them on our official GNU web site, we should to seek
> RMS's advice. 
> 

Err... just to clarify. 

I was present at the meeting that Prof Nagarjuna mentioned, and I don't
think we are trying to remove the signatures of the non-Free sw from
those files. Our main issue is that the fonts that have been used are
non Free (probably) - and we were not very sure whether it is legally a
very sound step to host the PDFs in the FSF-I servers - as the fonts are
embedded in those PDFs. 
To know our exact legal standing, we need to find the license of the two
fonts - but copies of the relevant licenses are available neither with
me and nor with dipankar-da. I could only figure out the following
copyright information from the font files.


**********************************************************************
1. For Samit_ATM: 

Generated by Fontographer 0.0, Copyright Beam Engineers Cal. 22/8/93 


2. For Samit: (??)

* The Computer Engineering Co. 1994-95. Created by Samit Ray.

3.   For Satyajit:

Generated by Fontographer 3.5, Copyright Monotype India Ltd. Modified
original Bold PS Font for True Type.
**********************************************************************

Without knowledge of the license terms and conditions, we felt that it
would not be very prudent to go ahead with the hosting plans.

Right now, we are trying to create Free equivalents of the fonts used in
the document - that is, we are keeping the character - codepoint mapping
intact, we are just replacing the non-Free glyphs with Free ones. Once
that is done, we will change the font in the editable file created by
dipankar-da, generate PDFs with it in OpenOffice.org, and then I think
we would be able to host those files in the FSF-I server.

To summarise - FSF-I is just playing safe here, and personally, I see
nothing wrong with that.

-thanks-
Sayamindu

PS: And another thing - it is  (and was) always possible to use legacy
fonts like Samit/Satyajit in a GNU/Linux based system. I have the
technical know-how on how to get Samit/Satyajit working with
OpenOffice.org (complete with custom keyboard mapping and other such
fancy stuff). But since all these legacy fonts do not conform to any
kind of standard - that know-how will remain with me. 
Of course, if anyone is interested - s/he is free to figure out the
"hacks" himself/herself. :)