Xref: utzoo comp.graphics:16803 comp.sys.sgi:9011 gnu.misc.discuss:2720
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!munnari.oz.au!uniwa!bilby.cs.uwa.oz.au!woylie!nicholas
From: nicholas@bilby.cs.uwa.oz.au (Nicholas Yue)
Newsgroups: comp.graphics,comp.sys.sgi,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: SGI GL compatible Graphics Libraries
Summary: Is it legal to write libraries with similar names and argument type?
Keywords: iris,SGI,GL,graphics libraries,legality,copyright
Message-ID: <nicholas.669696227@woylie>
Date: 23 Mar 91 02:43:47 GMT
Organization: Dept. Computer Science, University of Western Australia.
Lines: 18

Hi,
  I have a question regarding graphics libraries and copyright that seems very
complicated for me to understand.
  I was hoping to write a graphics libraries that has the same functionality as
GL from Silicon Graphics and or some other standard. The libraries will have
the same or similar subroutine names and argument types as GL or maybe PHIGS+
etc........
  But I am afraid of any legal consequences arising from such a venture. I do
not plan on making it commercial, just a library of graphics routines to make
life simple and common across other O/S and architecture.
  Does SGI have any comments? What about GNU, because I plan to give the
graphics library to GNU ( if I can get it done without being threaten with a
law suit, I am just a student with a lot of enthusiasm in computer graphics)?
  I have cross posted this to comp.graphics,comp.sys.sgi and gnu.misc.discuss.

Thanks In Advance

nicholas@cs.uwa.oz.au