I didn't know myself for sure whether it [Qt's filter code] was patent-infringing. But I did know: 1. Fedora tries not to ship patented technologies. 2. Fedora took subpixel filtering (due to its possible infringement) out of the desktop stack. 3. Qt has its own separate filtering code. 4. Fedora did NOT remove the Qt subpixel filters. Hence I began to wonder if A) Qt's filtering technique was considered as non-infringing, and B) if so, why not just use that for the rest of the X stack? But now I know the answer, that it really was infringing, but apparently Fedora didn't catch it, because they assumed Qt just used whatever filters everybody else used, without having duplicate filtering code of its own. I was wrong, but my thought process wasn't horrible flawed. I figured Fedora had already figured this stuff out (after all, I am not a lawyer, but I thought certainly Fedora was on good legal ground), and yet there was an incongruity about their enforcement (Qt gets filters while the rest do not). So I concluded either A) Qt's filters were patent-safe, or B) Fedora missed it, and stupid me, I gave Fedora the benefit of the doubt. But I apologize for making a big deal about it. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
