[Scribus] offtopic: microsoft must pay to adobe to include pdf exportcapability

avox avox
Mon Jun 5 16:47:42 CEST 2006

Khiraly wrote:
> Hi!
> Its a bit offtopic, but anyway;)
> Why Microsoft must pay to adobe if wantto include pdf export capability
> to microsoft office?:
> http://www.itwire.com.au/content/view/4509/53/
> Is pdf/X-3 not an accepted iso standard, or am I misread something?
> ...
> Can somebody clarify me, why for example scribus dont need to pay to
> adobe for example?

Well, PDF patent issues aren't precisely off-topic :-)

In this case it looks that Adobe bases their action on anti-trust claims
(if they really want to do that, so far I've heard only the MS side).

I don't think they could base a lawsuit against MS solely based on patents
without damaging PDF really bad. I'm also pretty sure that they have
to ensure all patents concerning standard ahve to be licensed on a 
non-discriminating basis (and in this case also royalty-free).

I'm pretty sure they won't be able to base a lawsuit against Scribus 
or OO.o on an anti-trust claim :-)

View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/offtopic%3A-microsoft-must-pay-to-adobe-to-include-pdf-export%09capability-t1735108.html#a4715993
Sent from the Scribus forum at Nabble.com.

More information about the scribus mailing list