Since the latest TCPDF version, the TCPDF tagline is not displayed anymore but
it is still present and cannot be removed.
The TCPDF license doesn't allows you to remove the tagline.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
I respect your work but I do not respect the way you brand the library. I
neither can find a hint in your description nor inside the source code that
there is a transparent branding. Even how you try to hide it is
unacceptable. Why is it transparent? If it is visible I have the chance to
decide wether I accept the branding and use your lib or try to find another
one.
You provide your under the LGPL, is that right? Refering to this license I am
allowed to modify the code as long as it acts as expected. I do not expect any
transparent text that I do not have passed to the lib. So why I am not allowed
to change this? Please be so kind and show me the part of the LGPL where this
special case is regulated.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
I respect your work but I do not respect the way you brand the library.
If you do not respect the license, you can't use it.
I neither can find a hint in your description nor inside the source code
that there is a transparent branding.
It is a copyright notice and link where to find the original source code and I
require to keep it intact.
Even how you try to hide it is unacceptable. Why is it transparent?
It is transparent to not interfere with the page layout and graphics.
Why are you worried about the copyright notice if it doesn't interfere with
your document layout and graphics?
Since you are getting more for nothing at least you should give the proper
credits.
If it is visible I have the chance to decide wether I accept the branding
and use your lib or try to find another one.
Please note that this in NOT public domain software but FLOSS licensed under
GNU-LGPLv3 ( http://www.gnu.org/licenses/lgpl.html
). You have to follow some rules, including reporting copyright notices.
Refering to this license I am allowed to modify the code ...
Yes, you have the freedom to modify the code but you have to follow some rules
too.
So why I am not allowed to change this?
There are several reasons.
It is a copyright notice and link where to find the original source code and
you can't remove it (as per license rule).
The tagline is important to promote the TCPDF project and continue its
development.
Removing the tagline damages the project and doesn't give you any advantage.
Please be so kind and show me the part of the LGPL where this special case
is regulated.
4.c) For a Combined Work that displays copyright notices during execution, include the copyright notice for the Library among these notices [...]
5.b) Give prominent notice with the combined library that part of it is a work based on the Library, and explaining where to find the accompanying uncombined form of the same work.
Additionally you must provide a prominent copyright notice on your application
or Web interface:
Nicola, I don't think that you can use the term "Combined work" for the
created pdf. It applies to the application using the linked library. That
becomes evident by reading "You may convey a Combined Work under terms of your
choice that, taken together, effectively do not restrict modification of the
portions of the Library contained in the Combined Work". There are no portions
of the library contained in the pdf. If you read further it also requires you
to accompany your "combined work" with "a copy of the GNU GPL and this license
document.". This further clarifies that this cannot apply to the pdf
created. It obviously is nonsense to require handing out of GPL and other
license notes with each pdf that you print and hand-out. So, the term
"combined work" can only apply to the application+library. And there's nothing
in the LGPL license that requires any notice of modifications if the "combined
work" is not "conveyed" (e.g. you distribute the modified version of the library).
Am I wrong?
I haven't seen this "tagline" yet, I'm not using the latest version. Where did
you start using it? 5.9? I would expect a notice about this in the
documentation or downloads page. Is there one?
If there is a transparent tagline (I read that as "you cannot see it") I
cannot see how this promotes the project or gives proper credit: one cannot
see it !!!!!! On the other hand there's the information you get from the
property sheet and which also gives proper credit to TCPDF. That is visible.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Don't get me wrong, Olaf. I'm merely suggesting that this LGPL interpretation
does not cover what Nicola states above. I'm not suggesting that you remove
that tagline code yourself. If I were Nicola I would ask FSF for clarification
on this matter. Maybe he's already done so and they approve of his
interpretation that the created output has to carry his copyright notice. But
he didn't say so.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Except the GNU-LGPL interpretation, removing the tagline is explicitly
forbidden by the TCPDF license: http://www.tecnick.com/pagefiles/tcpdf/LICENSE.TXT "YOU CAN'T REMOVE ANY TCPDF COPYRIGHT NOTICE OR LINK FROM THE GENERATED PDF DOCUMENTS."
If there is a transparent tagline (I read that as "you cannot see it") I
cannot see how this promotes the project or gives proper credit: one cannot
see it !!!!!!
The tagline and standard meta-tags have similar purposes but works in
different way, the tagline works like a custom meta-tag without altering the
document layout.
I think that someone worried about removing the invisible TCPDF tagline is
also removing any other TCPDF metatag stating what tool has been used to
produce the document. This is unacceptable because, in this case, you are
crediting something/someone else for the TCPDF work, and this violates both
copyright and TCPF license. This is why is important leaving the meta-tags and
tagline in their place.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
I doubt that you can enforce such a requirement. Anyway. As I understand the
OP was objecting against the visible tagline because it screwed his layout. I
cannot see or detect any of that invisible tagline in your examples. So, for
the greater audience, it doesn't exist. Fine. The problem that I see with this
is that one doesn't know what you print there. Which means a) it doesn't work
as a copyright or promotion notice and b) users may unknowingly violate a
requirement of their employer or client and c) users cannot verify if the
invisible tagline is correct. Also, removing that remark doesn't credit anyone
else and is as such not a copyright violation.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
As I understand the OP was objecting against the visible tagline because it
screwed his layout.
This was just a problem (bug) on a old TCPDF version.
The problem that I see with this is that one doesn't know what you print
there.
The tagline works only as a meta-tag on the digital file, nothing is printed,
so your problem doesn't exist.
TCPDF is a "secure" product, and, in contrast of the closed-source
applications, you can check everything since it is open source.
Please do not insist forcing your own license interpretation, the license is
clear: "YOU CAN'T REMOVE ANY TCPDF COPYRIGHT NOTICE OR LINK FROM THE GENERATED
PDF DOCUMENTS". If you do not agree with the license simply stop using the
library.
Additionally, I hope you are respecting the other requirements of the license
by stating that you are using TCPDF on your Website/Application and giving a
back-link to original project website and license.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Just for clarification: you are not talking about the metadata "TCPDF
<version> (http://www.tcpdf.org) (www.tcpdf.org%29)" that is displayed
with a "created by/with" in your language in the Windows property sheet, are
you?
About your last paragraph: I can't see such a requirement in the license of
the version I use. And I cannot see such a requirement in the 5.9.22 license
that I looked at yesterday. Remember, we are not talking about conveyed work
here.
Please understand that I do not "force my own license interpretation". You
based your answer in 5. above on some sections of the LGPL that only apply if
you convey a work. Simple use of it is not conveying. Only later you refer
to your own short license addition.
Please also understand that I do not remove copyright notices from your work
or output produced by your work or suggest that others do so. I'm writing this
because you seem to imply that in your answer 12. If you didn't want to imply
that I misunderstood.</version>
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
How can I turn off the Powered by TCPDF text when PDF's are generated. It runs
through some important parts of my PDFs.
Since the latest TCPDF version, the TCPDF tagline is not displayed anymore but
it is still present and cannot be removed.
The TCPDF license doesn't allows you to remove the tagline.
The version with transparent tagline is 5.9.017.
Dear Nicola,
I respect your work but I do not respect the way you brand the library. I
neither can find a hint in your description nor inside the source code that
there is a transparent branding. Even how you try to hide it is
unacceptable. Why is it transparent? If it is visible I have the chance to
decide wether I accept the branding and use your lib or try to find another
one.
You provide your under the LGPL, is that right? Refering to this license I am
allowed to modify the code as long as it acts as expected. I do not expect any
transparent text that I do not have passed to the lib. So why I am not allowed
to change this? Please be so kind and show me the part of the LGPL where this
special case is regulated.
If you do not respect the license, you can't use it.
It is a copyright notice and link where to find the original source code and I
require to keep it intact.
It is transparent to not interfere with the page layout and graphics.
Why are you worried about the copyright notice if it doesn't interfere with
your document layout and graphics?
Since you are getting more for nothing at least you should give the proper
credits.
Please note that this in NOT public domain software but FLOSS licensed under
GNU-LGPLv3 (
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/lgpl.html
). You have to follow some rules, including reporting copyright notices.
Yes, under:
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/lgpl.html
Yes, you have the freedom to modify the code but you have to follow some rules
too.
There are several reasons.
It is a copyright notice and link where to find the original source code and
you can't remove it (as per license rule).
The tagline is important to promote the TCPDF project and continue its
development.
Removing the tagline damages the project and doesn't give you any advantage.
4.c) For a Combined Work that displays copyright notices during execution, include the copyright notice for the Library among these notices [...]
5.b) Give prominent notice with the combined library that part of it is a work based on the Library, and explaining where to find the accompanying uncombined form of the same work.
Additionally you must provide a prominent copyright notice on your application
or Web interface:
Please carefully read the
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/lgpl.html
for additional information.
Nicola, I don't think that you can use the term "Combined work" for the
created pdf. It applies to the application using the linked library. That
becomes evident by reading "You may convey a Combined Work under terms of your
choice that, taken together, effectively do not restrict modification of the
portions of the Library contained in the Combined Work". There are no portions
of the library contained in the pdf. If you read further it also requires you
to accompany your "combined work" with "a copy of the GNU GPL and this license
document.". This further clarifies that this cannot apply to the pdf
created. It obviously is nonsense to require handing out of GPL and other
license notes with each pdf that you print and hand-out. So, the term
"combined work" can only apply to the application+library. And there's nothing
in the LGPL license that requires any notice of modifications if the "combined
work" is not "conveyed" (e.g. you distribute the modified version of the
library).
Am I wrong?
I haven't seen this "tagline" yet, I'm not using the latest version. Where did
you start using it? 5.9? I would expect a notice about this in the
documentation or downloads page. Is there one?
If there is a transparent tagline (I read that as "you cannot see it") I
cannot see how this promotes the project or gives proper credit: one cannot
see it !!!!!! On the other hand there's the information you get from the
property sheet and which also gives proper credit to TCPDF. That is visible.
Thanks Kai,
youre my man!
Also consider this: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-
faq.html#GPLOutput
Don't get me wrong, Olaf. I'm merely suggesting that this LGPL interpretation
does not cover what Nicola states above. I'm not suggesting that you remove
that tagline code yourself. If I were Nicola I would ask FSF for clarification
on this matter. Maybe he's already done so and they approve of his
interpretation that the created output has to carry his copyright notice. But
he didn't say so.
Except the GNU-LGPL interpretation, removing the tagline is explicitly
forbidden by the TCPDF license:
http://www.tecnick.com/pagefiles/tcpdf/LICENSE.TXT
"YOU CAN'T REMOVE ANY TCPDF COPYRIGHT NOTICE OR LINK FROM THE GENERATED PDF DOCUMENTS."
The tagline and standard meta-tags have similar purposes but works in
different way, the tagline works like a custom meta-tag without altering the
document layout.
I think that someone worried about removing the invisible TCPDF tagline is
also removing any other TCPDF metatag stating what tool has been used to
produce the document. This is unacceptable because, in this case, you are
crediting something/someone else for the TCPDF work, and this violates both
copyright and TCPF license. This is why is important leaving the meta-tags and
tagline in their place.
I doubt that you can enforce such a requirement. Anyway. As I understand the
OP was objecting against the visible tagline because it screwed his layout. I
cannot see or detect any of that invisible tagline in your examples. So, for
the greater audience, it doesn't exist. Fine. The problem that I see with this
is that one doesn't know what you print there. Which means a) it doesn't work
as a copyright or promotion notice and b) users may unknowingly violate a
requirement of their employer or client and c) users cannot verify if the
invisible tagline is correct. Also, removing that remark doesn't credit anyone
else and is as such not a copyright violation.
License violators can be legally prosecuted.
This was just a problem (bug) on a old TCPDF version.
The tagline works only as a meta-tag on the digital file, nothing is printed,
so your problem doesn't exist.
TCPDF is a "secure" product, and, in contrast of the closed-source
applications, you can check everything since it is open source.
Please do not insist forcing your own license interpretation, the license is
clear: "YOU CAN'T REMOVE ANY TCPDF COPYRIGHT NOTICE OR LINK FROM THE GENERATED
PDF DOCUMENTS". If you do not agree with the license simply stop using the
library.
Additionally, I hope you are respecting the other requirements of the license
by stating that you are using TCPDF on your Website/Application and giving a
back-link to original project website and license.
Just for clarification: you are not talking about the metadata "TCPDF
<version> (http://www.tcpdf.org) (www.tcpdf.org%29)" that is displayed
with a "created by/with" in your language in the Windows property sheet, are
you?
About your last paragraph: I can't see such a requirement in the license of
the version I use. And I cannot see such a requirement in the 5.9.22 license
that I looked at yesterday. Remember, we are not talking about conveyed work
here.
Please understand that I do not "force my own license interpretation". You
based your answer in 5. above on some sections of the LGPL that only apply if
you convey a work. Simple use of it is not conveying. Only later you refer
to your own short license addition.
Please also understand that I do not remove copyright notices from your work
or output produced by your work or suggest that others do so. I'm writing this
because you seem to imply that in your answer 12. If you didn't want to imply
that I misunderstood.</version>