<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class="">
Hi Karl, Norbert, Peter,<br class="">
<div><br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">On 7 Sep 2018, at 7:19 am, Karl Berry <<a href="mailto:karl@freefriends.org" class="">karl@freefriends.org</a>> wrote:</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<div class="">
<div class="">sRGB_IEC61966-2-1_black_scaled.icc is non-free and should be removed<br class="">
from TeX Live.<br class="">
<br class="">
Ok, done. (I wonder if <a href="https://protect-au.mimecast.com/s/-HlJClx1OYUo9g8quqbkbq?domain=argyllcms.com" class="">
http://argyllcms.com/</a> has any other free profiles.)<br class="">
<br class="">
<a href="https://protect-au.mimecast.com/s/GQANCmO5wZs50E3LcQH9Vl?domain=bugs.debian.org" class="">https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=786946</a><br class="">
…</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div>This page says that the ICC profiles *are* free.</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div>
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">Debian Bug report logs - #786946<br class="">
lintian: false positive: icc-profiles *are* free<br class="">
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<br class="">
</div>
<div>But that was back in 2015; then you were arguing that they are free.</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">
<div class="">and the final clarification of the license in 2017.<br class="">
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div>OK. There is a single-line statement saying: "<span style="white-space: pre-wrap; background-color: rgb(254, 254, 254);" class="">not free"</span></div>
<div>without any explanation of why Debian has determined this.</div>
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">
<div class=""><br class="">
I guess at <a href="https://protect-au.mimecast.com/s/l0kuCnx1Z5UGyM2psEdNnH?domain=color.org" class="">
http://www.color.org/srgbprofiles.xalter</a>,<br class="">
which says the file may not be changed.<br class="">
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div>It is not changed, so far as I’m aware;</div>
<div> pdfTeX just includes the binary file verbatim.</div>
<div>Not sure about XeTeX and LuaTeX, but I cannot imagine why</div>
<div>they would change anything about it.</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">
<div class=""><br class="">
We should inform Ross that he removes/replaces the files in [pdfx]<br class="">
<br class="">
.. and update the code and doc, which now use the sRGB profile.<br class="">
Cc-ing Ross.<br class="">
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div>If this is going to stop Debian from distributing TeXLive, then I suppose</div>
<div>we should change the profile. </div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div>Can we switch to: sRGB2014.icc from </div>
<div> <a href="http://www.color.org/srgbprofiles.xalter" class="">http://www.color.org/srgbprofiles.xalter</a> ?</div>
<div>Or will that be subject to the same objection?</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">What about the updated v4 profiles, on that same page?</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">
<div> sRGB_v4_ICC_preference.icc</div>
<div> sRGB_v4_ICC_preference_displayclass.icc</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div>Their licensing seems to be a bit more liberal than before;</div>
<div>viz. from <a href="http://www.color.org/profiles2.xalter#license" class="">http://www.color.org/profiles2.xalter#license</a></div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class=""></div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">Licensing<br class="">
<br class="">
The copyright owner and terms of use of an ICC profile are normally identified in the Creator field in the profile header and in the Copyright tag. Where ICC is the copyright owner, the following license terms apply:<br class="">
<br class="">
"This profile is made available by the International Color Consortium, and may be copied, distributed, embedded, made, used, and sold without restriction. Altered versions of this profile shall have the original identification and copyright information removed
and shall not be misrepresented as the original profile."<br class="">
<br class="">
<div>ICC recommends that other profile creators and copyright owners adopt a similar wording for profiles that are intended to be freely distributed. See the Profile Registration page for more details.</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">On the other hand, sRGB_IEC61966-2-1_black_scaled.icc </div>
<div class="">is still available at <a href="http://www.color.org/black_scaled_2009_srgb.xalter" class="">http://www.color.org/black_scaled_2009_srgb.xalter</a></div>
<div class="">where it says:</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class=""></div>
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class=""></div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">Legacy v2 sRGB profile<br class="">
<br class="">
This sRGB profile has been superseded by the sRGB2014.icc profile, following a 2014 corrigendum to IEC 61966. This previous version of the profile is made available for those who need it for compatibility with existing workflows.<br class="">
Note that this version of the profile has different licensing terms from the standard ICC profile license<br class="">
<br class="">
License<br class="">
<br class="">
To anyone who acknowledges that the file "sRGB_IEC61966-2-1_no_black_scaling.icc" is provided "AS IS" WITH NO EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTY, permission to use, copy and distribute these file for any purpose is hereby granted without fee, provided that the file
is not changed including the ICC copyright notice tag, and that the name of ICC shall not be used in advertising or publicity pertaining to distribution of the software without specific, written prior permission. ICC makes no representations about the suitability
of this software for any purpose.</div>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">So it would seem:</div>
<div class=""> sRGB2014.icc is free</div>
<div class=""> sRGB_IEC61966-2-1_black_scaled.icc is not free.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Agreed?</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">And what about the CMYK profile? coated_FOGRA39L_argl.icc</div>
<div class="">Has an objection to this ever been raised?</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">That file is no longer available at: <a href="http://www.color.org/registry/index.xalter" class="">http://www.color.org/registry/index.xalter</a></div>
<div class="">which is where we got it from, I think.</div>
<div class="">The licensing on the files available there now says things like:</div>
<div class=""> </div>
<div class=""></div>
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class=""></div>
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">Profile Name: PSOuncoated_v3_FOGRA52.icc<br class="">
<br class="">
Profile Provider: European Color Initiative (ECI)<br class="">
<br class="">
Contact: Florian Suessl<br class="">
<br class="">
Copyright: Heidelberger Druckmaschinen AG<br class="">
<br class="">
License: This profile is made available by ECI European Color Initiative, with permission of Heidelberger Druckmaschinen AG, and may be used, embedded and exchanged without restriction. It may not be distributed, sold or altered without written permission of
ECI European Color Initiative. Color Toolbox 17.0.0 - (c) Copyright 2015 Heidelberger Druckmaschinen AG. All Rights Reserved.</div>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div>So these would be classed as “not free” right?</div>
<div>Is it reasonable for TeXLive to request permission to distribute </div>
<div>from some of these places: ECI, IDEAlliance, VIGC, … ?</div>
<div>But if granted, would Debian be able to re-distribute?</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">
<div class=""><br class="">
I hope the gs profiles are free. -k<br class="">
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br class="">
</div>
<div>Please clarify, and give a clear reason why you think there is a violation</div>
<div>by including these files.</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div>Alternatively, there is this site:</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div> <a href="https://sourceforge.net/projects/openicc/files/OpenICC-Profiles/" class="">
https://sourceforge.net/projects/openicc/files/OpenICC-Profiles/</a></div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div>Worth investigating?</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div>Cheers,</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"></span>Ross</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<br class="">
</body>
</html>