AWARE SYSTEMS
TIFF and LibTiff Mail List Archive

Thread

2008.07.28 08:49 "[Tiff] CVS access", by Mateusz Łoskot
2008.07.28 13:01 "[Fwd: Re: [Tiff] CVS access]", by Edward Lam
2008.07.28 14:02 "Re: [Tiff] CVS access", by Mateusz Loskot
2008.07.28 23:17 "Re: [Tiff] CVS access", by Ryan Schmidt
2008.07.28 23:57 "Re: [Tiff] CVS access", by Frank Warmerdam
2008.07.29 16:37 "Re: [Tiff] CVS access", by Gary McGath
2008.07.29 17:43 "Re: [Tiff] CVS access", by Graeme Gill
2008.07.29 20:17 "Re: [Tiff] CVS access", by Gene Amtower
2008.07.29 21:01 "Re: [Tiff] CVS access", by Bob Friesenhahn
2008.07.29 22:04 "Re: [Tiff] CVS access", by Gene Amtower
2008.07.30 09:32 "Re: [Tiff] CVS access", by Andrew Brooks
2008.08.11 20:55 "Re: [Tiff] windows 64 bit build", by Bob Friesenhahn
2008.08.11 19:35 "Re: [Tiff] windows 64 bit build", by Mikhail Kruk
2008.08.11 17:57 "[Tiff] windows 64 bit build", by Mikhail Kruk
2008.08.11 19:29 "Re: [Tiff] windows 64 bit build", by Bob Friesenhahn
2008.08.12 00:41 "Re: [Tiff] windows 64 bit build", by Edward Lam
2008.08.11 20:03 "Re: [Tiff] windows 64 bit build", by Edward Lam
2008.08.11 20:51 "Re: [Tiff] windows 64 bit build", by Bob Friesenhahn
2008.08.12 00:36 "Re: [Tiff] windows 64 bit build", by Edward Lam
2008.08.12 02:44 "Re: [Tiff] windows 64 bit build", by Bob Friesenhahn
2008.08.12 03:53 "Re: [Tiff] windows 64 bit build", by Edward Lam
2008.08.12 04:04 "Re: [Tiff] windows 64 bit build", by Mikhail Kruk
2008.08.12 12:54 "Re: [Tiff] windows 64 bit build", by Edward Lam
2008.08.12 04:47 "Re: [Tiff] windows 64 bit build", by Bob Friesenhahn
2008.08.12 13:04 "Re: [Tiff] windows 64 bit build", by Edward Lam
2008.08.13 04:23 "[Tiff] tif_win32.c patch proposal (was: windows 64 bit build)", by Edward Lam
2008.08.13 05:32 "[Tiff] Re: tif_win32.c patch proposal (was: windows 64 bit build)", by Bob Friesenhahn
2008.09.04 14:12 "[Tiff] Re: tif_win32.c patch proposal", by Edward Lam

2008.07.28 23:57 "Re: [Tiff] CVS access", by Frank Warmerdam

On Jul 28, 2008, at 09:02, Mateusz Loskot wrote:

No, my guess is that you're looking at the hijacked domain, libtiff.org. Please go to the second google link instead... http://www.remotesensing.org/libtiff/

Thanks for reminding me what's the issue. I completely forgot libtiff.org has been hijacked domain.

Hijacked! That sucks. Is there no legal recourse available?

I was wondering why libtiff.org showed different versions than www.remotesensing.org/libtiff/. How are users meant to know that libtiff.org is not the real web site of the libtiff project? The real web site makes no mention of it...

Ryan,

The real web site does not reference libtiff.org any more - that's the main clue. Beyond that how much point is there in talking about the hijacked site to people who have made it to the real site?

Whether or not there might be legal recourse, it isn't worth it to us (or at least me) to pursue, and our claim might be weak. Just one of those things that sucks.

Best regards,
--
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------

I set the clouds in motion - turn up   | Frank Warmerdam, warmerdam@pobox.com
light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam

and watch the world go round - Rush    | President OSGeo, http://osgeo.org