Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Interview with Don Marti

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the troublemaker dept.

mpawlo writes "I just picked Don Marti's brain in a short interview published by Greplaw. Don Marti is the editor of LinuxJournal and the mastermind behind the Burnallgifs campaign. He has strong views on free software, software patentability and the freedom of the Internet. Marti should personally be featured in any encyclopedia under 'geektivism' and the brief interview may be of interest to Slashdotters not yet familiar with Mr Marti."

73 comments

  1. I love Don Marti! by jeramybsmith · · Score: 2, Funny

    His cartoons in Mad magazine were the best!

    --
    Never overestimate the end user. -jeramy b. smith
    1. Re:I love Don Marti! by khuber · · Score: 1

      That was my first thought. It's some Linux guy though. *shrug*

    2. Re:I love Don Marti! by Raiford · · Score: 2
      I guess this humor was just enough over the head to require an oxygen mask ...

      --
      "player 4 hit player 1 with 0 stroms"
  2. Burn all gifs, huh? by $carab · · Score: 2

    Curious how 3 out of 4 images on the page are gifs.....Sorta like that Mandrake page explaining GNU, where the GNU gnu image is a gif....

    Hypocrisy anyone?

    1. Re:Burn all gifs, huh? by Cyph · · Score: 2

      Quoting the article:


      # Greplaw still uses GIFs. What should we do instead?

      Use PNG or JPEG images, depending on which gives you the best quality and image size. Almost all browsers in use today support both.

      I don't think the interview was about promoting the BurnAllGifs campaign, it was more about finding out what makes Don Marti tick. :)

    2. Re:Burn all gifs, huh? by 56ker · · Score: 1

      Is this all because the gif format is copyrighted and not open source? Sorry for seeming absolutely dense to 98% of the people here but I'm having trouble remembering what the trouble is with gifs.

      --


      Video Game cheats, hints a
    3. Re:Burn all gifs, huh? by infornogr · · Score: 1

      Apparently he's not too wild about software patents. I can understand why he doesn't like gif because of that, but the rest of his reasons are silly. He called gif an "outdated" format that is only used to be compatible with older browsers. Riiiight. I'm sure the entire world secretly wants to use png on their websites, but, gosh-darn-it, those ancient browsers that everyone uses only support gif. _Nobody_ uses browsers like Netscape or IE or Opera or Mozilla or any of the other browsers that support png. What's this world coming to? (/sarcasm)

    4. Re:Burn all gifs, huh? by khuber · · Score: 1

      Unisys has a patent on LZW compression which is used in the GIF format.

    5. Re:Burn all gifs, huh? by blakestah · · Score: 4, Informative

      The LZW compression algorithm is patented. This is used in, for example, UNIX compress. In response to this, GNU wrote gzip for compression. GIF images also use the LZW algorithm.

      Unisys owns licensing rights to the LZW patent. They typically go to web site operators (large ones), and ask them to pay licensing fees, or prove that all the GIFs they serve came from licensed programs. Kinda creepy. Of course, none of the enforcement came until GIFs were widely used.

      In response, a group of open source hackers wrote the png spec, which uses the gzip compression technique. Also, postscript and pdf added gzip compression (flate compression) in addition to LZW compression, so that people could make pdfs without worrying about patent licensing.

      The GIF patent will expire in less than a year, I think. It is still WIDELY used. However, development has continued at full speed on png formats, and has halted on GIFs. Even when they become legal, the next generation of software will use pngs instead (because the DEVELOPMENT stopped, not because it "used to be patented").

    6. Re:Burn all gifs, huh? by Joe+Tie. · · Score: 2, Informative

      _Nobody_ uses browsers like Netscape or IE or Opera or Mozilla or any of the other browsers that support png.

      IE (for windows) and png support are two things I very rarely see in the same sentence unless poor is in there as well somewhere. Though I'm more annoyed by it's total lack of mng support than it half assed png support.

      --
      Everything will be taken away from you.
    7. Re:Burn all gifs, huh? by *xpenguin* · · Score: 3, Informative

      The GIF patent will expire in less than a year, I think.

      The GIF patent expires June 20, 2003 and is US patent 4,558,302.

    8. Re:Burn all gifs, huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      PNGs work fine in IE, except for transparency. Not sure why they haven't fixed transparency either, they've already got it implemented in a filter.

    9. Re:Burn all gifs, huh? by Luminous+Coward · · Score: 1
      The GIF patent expires June 20, 2003 and is US patent 4,558,302.
      US patent 4,558,302 is dated December 10, 1985. I thought patents were granted for 20 years?
    10. Re:Burn all gifs, huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually I seem to recall IBM also had a patent on some portion of LZW as well... Can't remember exactly...

  3. This is Spinal Tap! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Any relation to Marti DeBergi?

  4. Linux Journal by Cpl+Laque · · Score: 1

    I have enjoy Linux Journal since I started to subscribe to it a little over a year ago. What direction do you see the Journal going in the next 5 years ? If(but more likely when) Linux gains more mainstream support do expect to include more "beginner" type articles and running such promotions like including distrobutions of Linux? Keep up the good work.

    --
    It's all Politics
    1. Re:Linux Journal by BitHive · · Score: 1

      Um, who are you talking to? This is a link to an interview, not a request for questions.

  5. Don Marti? by otuz · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Duh, dissappointing.
    I thought they were interviewing Don Martin from MAD.

    1. Re:Don Marti? by geekster · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I know, and then your next thought go to Don Rose and what a great cartoonist. I start to remember how drunk I am, finaly getting thoroughly wasted on a friday night (though only to end the night here so soon)... Oh well, cartoons are nice, I'm sure this guy is okay too, I'll have to check it out when I'm a little bit less drunk.

  6. Slashdotters? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Like our purpose in life is to slashdot websites?

  7. Gifs post-unisys protection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Now that Unisys' patent is set to expire early next year, the gif format will be free once again. Looking back, did you feel your campaign was successful? What would you have done differently, if you could? Finally, will you drop your campaign to "burnallgifs" once the format is "free"?

    Cheers,
    Nicholas

  8. Bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    every site that does a dynamic map or chart in GIF format has to get a separate license

    http://cloanto.com/users/mcb/19950127giflzw.html

    Here's a clip:

    GIF files are not covered by the patent. There is no risk in distributing GIF files or in using the GIF name. According to a CompuServe spokesperson, "Recent discussions of GIF taxes and fees are totally without merit. For people who view GIF images, who keep GIF images on servers, or who are creating GIF images for distribution, the recent licensing discussions have no effect on their activities."

    1. Re:Bullshit by blakestah · · Score: 3, Informative

      GIF files are not covered by the patent. There is no risk in distributing GIF files or in using the GIF name. According to a CompuServe spokesperson, "Recent discussions of GIF taxes and fees are totally without merit. For people who view GIF images, who keep GIF images on servers, or who are creating GIF images for distribution, the recent licensing discussions have no effect on their activities."

      I think the most critical aspect of that article occurs earlier, where it says
      Nothing in this article should be regarded as legal counsel. If you require legal or other expert assistance, you should consult a professional advisor.

      Also, the article is wrong. Unisys now claims that distributing GIFs requires making a copy of a file that requires the LZW algorithm. Thus, it is also patent protected. So far, they've done a pretty good business collecting fees from web site operators.

  9. Offtopic, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I know this is really offtopic, but how do most people pronounce GIF? I've always pronounced it like "gift" without a t, but everyone else I know seems to call it "jiff". Seems like a good slashdot poll to me.

    1. Re:Offtopic, but... by khuber · · Score: 1

      Compuserve (format inventor I believe) said it was to be prounced jiff. I have always pronounced it like gift because that seems more logical (G in Graphics has a guh sound not a jih sound).

    2. Re:Offtopic, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Here goes...
      • GIF: like "gift", minus the t
      • JPEG: like "Jay" plus "peg"
      • PNG: like "ping" slashdot.org -f
      I do not thing there is much question about jpeg or png, but you never know..
    3. Re:Offtopic, but... by Boss,+Pointy+Haired · · Score: 2

      I pronounce it like you (Gif{!t}), but you can't really argue with those who pronounce it "jif" since this is the soundex of the first two letters of "gigolo" amongst other words.

    4. Re:Offtopic, but... by rabidcow · · Score: 1
      "jiff" is the official pronunciation:
      http://www.colorado.edu/~hyperlst/html-developers/ old/0541.html

      I worked with the creator of GIF (Steve Wilhite) when I was still
      employed by CompuServe. Steve always pronounced it "jiff" and
      would correct those who pronounced it with a hard G. "Choosy
      developers choose GIF" (spinning off of a historically popular
      peanut butter commercial).
    5. Re:Offtopic, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      "Choosy developers choose GIF"

      Personally, I much prefer the quote "Beware of geeks bearing GIFs".

  10. I'm no expert on graphical formats by IIRCAFAIKIANAL · · Score: 2

    but if I wanted to get rid of gifs used in an application I support, I would have to replace them with an animated, lightweight (ie/ not flash) solution

    What would work?

    (I'm not asking Don Marti, I read the header, unlike all the rest asking questions when it's actually a link to an interview that already took place. I'm asking the rest of you Slashdot readers. Just thought I'd clarify that. God I'm bored right now.)

    --
    Robots are everywhere, and they eat old people's medicine for fuel.
    1. Re:I'm no expert on graphical formats by IIRCAFAIKIANAL · · Score: 2

      Answering my own question here - MNG format appears to be an alternative, but MSIE doesn't seem to support it out-of-the box.

      Since 99% of my users are running IE, that's a bit annoying :\

      --
      Robots are everywhere, and they eat old people's medicine for fuel.
    2. Re:I'm no expert on graphical formats by HappyPhunBall · · Score: 1

      You could try using png format images. The libpng group provides a browser support reference.

      For the images that require animation, you could look into the MNG/JNG format. A reference is available here. Support does not seem to very widespread but that may not matter depending on the intended audience for your application.

    3. Re:I'm no expert on graphical formats by Joe+Tie. · · Score: 1

      Answering my own question here - MNG format appears to be an alternative, but MSIE doesn't seem to support it out-of-the box.

      Really a pity too. I was lucky enough to have a significant enough lack of IE users on my page to be able to use mng. The extra space saved by using mng instead of gif builds up surprisingly fast.

      --
      Everything will be taken away from you.
  11. Totally incorrect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    The correct pronounciations are:
    • GIF: like "Jif", the peanut butter
    • PNG: "P N G"
    Please educate yourself next time before you go and make yourself look foolish.
    1. Re:Totally incorrect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As for PNG, see this reference for the correct pronounciation.

      For GIF, I submit that your pronounciation is correct. However, the poster did not ask for the correct pronounciation, he asked how the readers of slashdot pronounced it. I pronounce it just like I said in the other post, as do many others. So congrats on being halfway right I suppose.

    2. Re:Totally incorrect by Reece400 · · Score: 1

      Personnally, i use the full names,, just se people don't argue with me, ie. PNG Portable Network Graphic, or GIF Graphic Interchange Format, etc. Reece,

    3. Re:Totally incorrect by Matt+-+Duke+'05 · · Score: 1

      "Please educate yourself next time before you go and make yourself look foolish".

      Dude. Do you know what an acronym is? Have you ever heard of scuba diving? Scuba happens to be an acronym for "self contained underwater breathing apparatus." The only reason that everyone, or at least everyone that I know, pronounces it the same way is that the acronym forms a conveniet English word.

      Now, on the other hand, the acronym PNG doesn't form a very convenient English word since it doesn't contain any vowels. Once again, perhaps you aren't aware, but every word in this language (except for the word nth) contains a vowel. Thus, there is no "correct" way to pronounce it. Likewise, for "gif", for the most part, English words beginning with a "gi" are pronounced with a hard "g", which would be pronounced just as the the "gi" in "gift" is.

      So bottom line, get off our high fucking horse. You don't represent absolute truth, so don't act like it in your fucking sig. Even if you did, at least have the deceny to not post anonymously.

      Ok, I'm now done educating you, you ignorant, self-righteous prick.

      --
      -Matt
      Duke '05
  12. curious george bush by yE+oLdE+pHaRt · · Score: 1

    now you see, this is why we never should have come down from the tres, waaaaay to complicated.

    --
    Cheer up the worst is yet to come!!! -yE oLdE pHaRt
  13. Burn All Gifs Mini-HOWTO by dananderson · · Score: 3, Informative
    For background information on BurnAllGIFs.ORG, see http://burnallgifs.org The software section is especially valuable.

    I use ESR's gif2png to convert my legacy GIF files to PNG for web use. I provide Solaris SPARC and x86 packages (Linux packages are available elsewhere).

  14. Don Marti? I thought I saw Don Martin by fluor2 · · Score: 1

    You know... Don Martin from Martin from MAD. I love him.

  15. A few comments by Elbereth · · Score: 3, Insightful
    1) As a few anonymous cowards have asked, "Who is Don Marti, and why should I care about his opinions?" I don't really see why this is headline news. Most of probably don't care about him, and his opinions are not very interesting or revolutionary. In short, he's just a regular guy who got interviewed. If I were a little more cynical, I might even suggest that this was a cheap ploy to get a few thousands hits on someone's banner ads.

    2) Quoting from the article:

    Software is a good thing because in software, a small investment can create and manage great complexity. When you impose the same transaction costs on software as on hardware, much useful software that could otherwise have been created does not exist. We are seeing this today in the field of video compression. The MPEG patent licensing mess is excluding everyone except for large, well-funded corporations from creating innovative new video-related software.

    I don't follow this. What MPEG patent licensing mess? There is none. If you want to use an algorithm developed by someone else, at great expense, you follow their rules. If you want to use their algorithm for free... then, I'm sorry, you'll just have to come up with your own algorithm. And when you're done, don't forget to give it away for free.

    3) Uhhh... this guy has what qualifications to be talking about law and interpreting the Constitution? I didn't see anything in his bio about being a lawyer.
    1. Re:A few comments by abe+ferlman · · Score: 2

      If you want to use an algorithm developed by someone else, at great expense, you follow their rules.

      Oh please.

      That boils down to "If you want to develop your own algorithm, you'd better make sure it has nothing in common with a million others developed at "great expense" or else follow their rules," which is an amazing hindrance to innovation. Furthermore, algorithms are mathematical constructs and should not be owned any more than arithmetical constructions can be owned.

      And you have to be a constitutional scholar to interpret the constitution?? What is this, a secret priesthood where the word of god is written on stone tablets that only the scribes can interpret? Constitutional theorists spend their lives thinking about fine points and hard cases, but this ain't one of 'em. The intention and spirit of the references to the LIMITED monopoly over ideas in the constitution is clear enough for any of us who are bound to follow it to understand.

      What's hard to understand is how money could have so thoroughly corrupted such a well-intentioned process.

      You seem overly concerned with making sure people who spend a lot of money make a profit, and not nearly concerned enough that the intellectual commons of our society is not plundered by teh interests of capital.

      --
      microsoftword.mp3 - it doesn't care that they're not words...
    2. Re:A few comments by Ed+Avis · · Score: 2

      The trouble is that independent creation is no defence to patent infringement, so if you did write your own algorithm you could still be sued if it had elements in common with the patent filed. I don't know about the MPEG patent in particular, but in many cases software patents are so broad you cannot write any algorithm that doesn't infringe. They become a government-granted monopoly on the whole application area.

      This is one of the reasons why copyright is a better fit for software than patents: if you create something independently, without looking at another's code, you cannot infringe the copyright.

      --
      -- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
    3. Re:A few comments by Matt+-+Duke+'05 · · Score: 0, Troll

      "The intention and spirit of the references to the LIMITED monopoly over ideas in the constitution is clear enough for any of us who are bound to follow it to understand."

      I'm sorry, but apparently you aren't one of those who are "bound to follow and understand" it. If you knew anthing about the topic, which clearly you don't, you would know that the strict "Jeffersonian" interpretation of the law is that "inventions then cannot, in nature, be a subject of property." While what I have quoted doesn't explicitly state it, Jefferson felt that _IDEAS_, not their implementation mind you, should not be "owned." Thus, as you have said, there is a "limited monopoly over ideas" since we shouldn't be able to own them. However, Jefferson, and the other men who originally devised these laws, said NOTHING of their implementation. So, as you yourself has stated, there is no such monopoly there.

      So, in response to your pedantic post, yes, I would be overly concerned with "making sure people who spend a lot of many make a profit." They spent a good deal of money expanding on an idea that someone (presumably not themselves) envisioned, and made it a reality. If these said people made a lot of money, and patented their specific implementation of an idea, then GOOD FOR THEM. Find your own fucking implementation and patent it. Otherwise don't disgrace Jefferson by misrepresenting his views on the issue.

      --
      -Matt
      Duke '05
    4. Re:A few comments by abe+ferlman · · Score: 1

      Regarding TJ, yes, I oversimplified. However, as you know, today's patent office fails to recognize the distinction. And you did not speak at all to the claim that algorithms are more like ideas than implementations anyway.

      Regarding the guarantee of profit, you are working from a very narrow mindset. I don't want to "find my own"..."implementation and patent it". Patents reduced the flexibility inventors have to make progress. Not only do I think I shouldn't, I don't think anyone should. It's like property rights over air or sunlight. If someone spends a lot of money developing a system to privatize the air in Pennsylvania so you couldn't breathe without a license, screw them- they spent their money on something that was going to mess with the commons, and far from being rewarded for their cash outlay they should be punished for attempting to steal our air. The fertile ground of the scientific exchange of ideas is not, admittedly, such an urgent every day need as air for most people, but the principle is the same. A patent robs people of 17 years worth of scientific advancement in the name of profit, and it's wrong.

      --
      microsoftword.mp3 - it doesn't care that they're not words...
  16. MOD PARENT DOWN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    stupid karma whores

  17. Re:my question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ah yes, Linux Journal, the publication that screws it's freelancers...

  18. any patentability qjkx by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The AIDS holocaust in Africa makes it clear that ANY patents are EVIL. End intellectual property laws! Ignore me!

  19. I don't know about the "Encyclopedia" by capedgirardeau · · Score: 1

    But everything2.com has never even heard of Geektivisim:

    Nothing Found
    Sorry, but nothing matching "geektivism" was found.
    If you Log in you could create a "geektivism" node. If you don't already have an account, you can Create A New User...

    Nor Don Marti:

    Here's the stuff we found when you searched for "don marti"
    [long list of non-don marti things snipped]
    If you Log in you could create a "don marti" node. If you don't already have an account, you can Create A New User...

    Maybe someone could log in and fix that, I never quite got into that whole everything2.com scene.

    --
    Wax on, wax off baby!
  20. I used to work with Don Marti! by TheNarrator · · Score: 1

    Long ago and far away at the beginning of the Dot.Com bubble I worked with Don Marti. He is largely responsible for turning me into the linux zealot I am today :). I have never met a nicer or more jovial geek.

  21. An Interview with a Dry Martini? by tiny69 · · Score: 2

    Damn, when I first read it I thought it said an Interview with a Dry Martini. I don't know about you, but the second one sounds much more enjoyable.

    --
    Go not unto/. for advice, for you will be told both yea and nay (but have nothing to do with the question)
  22. Re:*YAWN* WTF?!??!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    -1 flamebait, maybe. Hell, -1 troll, maybe, sure...but 'off topic'? I was exactly ON topic (and, inna just /., would recieve a +5 insightful mod.).

    Don't bogart the CRACKPIPE, you aryan DUMBFUCKS.

  23. Re:b4 it gets /.ed by Nerull · · Score: 1

    The INTERVIEW gets offtopic????
    Redundent I could see, but offtopic? It IS the topic!

  24. Eh? by by+Steven+Woston · · Score: 0

    "Jif" ? WTF are you smoking? As for P-N-G though, you are correct.

    --

    Steven Woston

    Lead Programmer, J-j-j-julius Software
    1. Re:Eh? by khuber · · Score: 1
      Of course you're wrong on both counts. *sigh*

      -Kevin

  25. If he hates Compuserve GIFs so much... by The_Guv'na · · Score: 1

    Why doesn't the Don just make them an offer they can't refuse?

    Ali

    --
    Ph33r m3!!!
  26. Great Interview by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I really liked the interview. Marti has a way of getting to the heart of issues in a clear and concise way.

  27. See him live! Feb. 4th by Bill+Kendrick · · Score: 2

    Don's coming to the Linux Users' Group of Davis, out here near Sacramento, on February 4th.

  28. Last Post! by alpg · · Score: 1

    "Linux was made by foreign terrorists to take money from true US companies
    like Microsoft." - Some AOL'er.
    "To this end we dedicate ourselves..." -Don
    -- From the sig of "Don", don@cs.byu.edu

    - this post brought to you by the Automated Last Post Generator...