While developing WebPDF.pro, my lecture on design and ease of use to all subpar embed-PDF-in-HTML solutions, I come to ask a developer who has removed a rendering mode support from one of the rendering engines I was considering for an official future evaluation, MuPDF, a simple question by email.

Sent from [email protected] (2021-03-21):

πŸ‘¨πŸ»β€πŸ’» Hi,

Why is drawPageAsSVG no longer there?

http://git.ghostscript.com/?p=mupdf.git;a=commit;h=aa3e7540556298a9ca0b5a9b913418c83217361f wasm: Remove obsolete demos and update Makefile.

Why was it removed in the above commit?

Thanks,
Cetin

Then comes a reply worthy of prominent display in the internet hall of shame.

Reply from πŸ”¨ Tor Andersson <[email protected]> (2021-03-24):

πŸ”¨ We removed experimental functions that were not used in our own WASM demos. Were you using this function? I do not recognize “webpdf.pro” as being a customer for our WASM product.

MuPDF is released under two licences. You have to pick one of them and abide by it.

The first license is the GNU AGPL. If you use this license you HAVE to release ALL the source code to your project as open source as well, and you do not get support (but we may fix bugs reported as time permits, but no guarantees!).

If you want support, or if you want to use MuPDF in a closed source project or SAAS server, then you need to acquire a commercial license from Artifex Software.

link to their-website/licensing

This condescending little Swede takes his liberties with my email domain, imagines I might just be using his precious tool for commercial gain without license and sees it within his rights to lecture me on GPL and dual-licensing, presuming guilt and wrongdoing! What an entitled load of non-sense!

When I tell him to behave himself better in future emails (to others, as I have forever blocked his presence), one final reply slips to my inbox trash (where such behavior rightfully belongs):

β‹― πŸ‘¨πŸ»β€πŸ’» I am very well aware of the two licenses around mupdf. β‹―

Reply from πŸ”¨ Tor Andersson <[email protected]> (2021-03-24):

πŸ”¨ How am I supposed to know that? You barge into my private email demanding answers to code I wrote ages ago, without introducing yourself and without explaining why you want to know. You’ll have to forgive me if I assume that you’re just another in a long line of clueless mobile web developers who have never heard of the GPL and think open source is the same as public domain. I didn’t want you to waste your time pursuing something that you end up not being able to use, because you either have no intent to pay for a license and can’t or don’t want to release the source to your project as GPL. β‹―

Ok, let us see the words of a person asking for forgiveness here.

πŸ”¨ How am I supposed to know that? β‹― I didn’t want you to waste your time pursuing something β‹―

Fair enough, you are not supposed to know that I am aware of and have internalized the principles of free software and dual-licensing.

You are just as not supposed to talk down to someone that has reached out to you on an unrelated topic,

  • assuming negligence, inexperience, inability to manage time in one email
  • and then dressing such behavior up as being considerate of my time in the next

πŸ”¨ barge into my email

I emailed the address associated with a commit on a public git repository.

πŸ”¨ demanding answers to code I wrote ages ago

I asked, in one simple sentence because I was considerate of his time, a very basic question on 2021-03-24 about his commit dated 2020-09-18 – that is 6 months and 6 days, and not ages, ago.


That is not how you conduct yourself in life or business.

The endless arrogance and sense of entitlement coming from a person born in such an irrelevant corner of the world as Sweden is nothing but very rich and ridiculous.

I do not want Mr. Andersson and other people from the West to waste their time pursuing a career in producing pitiable examples of being incapable of functioning in society in a civilized and educated manner.

I will have nothing to do with Tor Andersson and MuPDF.


Wow,

  • self-entitlement as company cultureβ„’
  • (worthless) softwareΒΉ as a disserviceβ„’

might as well be trademarks of artifex at this point.

1 full month later they still see it within their rights to disturb me without reason.

From Kate Degennaro <kate.deg[email protected]> (2021-04-16):

πŸ‘±πŸ»β€β™€οΈ Hello Cetin,

It has come to my attention from one of our senior engineers that your company may be using MuPDF without the proper license. Please fill me in on the following information:

  1. Are you using MuPDF as purely an “in-house” application?

  2. Are you distributing MuPDF in any fashion? I.e., Are you distributing Ghostscript within one of your applications, SaaS software or products?

This may seem a bit intrusive, but that is not the intent. We take copyright infringement very seriously and simply need more information regarding your use of MuPDF before we can assist. Many times companies will inadvertently use MuPDF improperly. I look forward to your immediate response.

Best regards,
Kate DeGennaro

My reply from [email protected] (2021-04-20)

πŸ‘¨πŸ»β€πŸ’» Hello Kate,

This is clearly your engineer making you overstep boundaries.

I am extremely disappointed in his condescending behavior and assumption of ill-will / license violation.

  1. Are you using MuPDF as purely an “in-house” application?

No.

  1. Are you distributing MuPDF in any fashion? I.e., Are you distributing Ghostscript within one of your applications, SaaS software or products?

No.

I was willing to review MuPDF for potential future commercial use but your engineer presented himself in such a ‘professional’ manner that it became clear any company who employs such people do not deserve anyone’s business.

I have decided to use wasm builds of PDFium from Google with their BSD/3 license instead.

Emails from artifex land in my spam folder by default.

Please take your time and do whatever you are capable of to have said artifex developer reprimanded for his ways. He is doing a terrible terrible job for artifex’s public image.

Thanks,
Cetin

πŸ‘¨πŸ»β€πŸ’» To clarify my previous answer,

  1. Are you using MuPDF as purely an “in-house” application?

No, I am not using MuPDF at all anywhere in any way.
I have nothing to do with your product just as you have nothing to do with me.

Refrain from further communications so as not to cost me time and effort unless it is to forward an official apology from said developer.
You can also apologize on his behalf as you seem to not mind spending your time for said developer.

Thanks,
Cetin