Newsgroups: sci.image.processing
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!nntp.club.cc.cmu.edu!hudson.lm.com!netline-fddi.jpl.nasa.gov!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!swrinde!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!tgl
From: tgl@netcom.com (Tom Lane)
Subject: Re: Wanna talk GIF??
Message-ID: <TGL.95Jan3204135@netcom19.netcom.com>
Sender: tgl@netcom.com (Tom Lane)
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services
References: <3eciaf$h5u@netaxs.com> <usenet-0301951950220001@lowry.eche.ualberta.ca>
Date: Wed, 4 Jan 1995 04:41:35 GMT
Lines: 17

usenet@lowry.eche.ualberta.ca (Brian Lowry) writes:
> ... TIFF is, and has
> always been, superior to GIF, and there's no lack of support for it.
> [TIFF supports LZW, naturally... as well as a whole slew of bit depths]

Stop to think half a second, man.  If Unisys succeeds in enforcing their
patent claim against LZW compression in GIF, whose doorstep will they be
on next?  That's right, TIFF users.  Better get your head out of the
clouds and pay attention to what's really going on here.

I happen to think there are three or four reasons why Unisys' claim is
invalid and immoral, but no court of law has ever asked me for advice.
In the current legal climate, they probably have a very good chance of
winning a suit.

			regards, tom lane
			organizer, Independent JPEG Group
