Sorry for being off-topic (and risking to feed a troll):
On Mon, 2006-03-27 at 22:36 -0800, Dennis Peterson wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > At 10:16 PM 3/27/2006, you wrote:
> >
> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...]
> >> That's what my license says - and I paid for it. IP theft is never
^^^^^^^
> >> irrelevant.
At least in the laws of continental Europe there is no such thing as "IP
theft" (and I doubt it exists in anglo-american jurisdiction either) -
only in the propaganda wording and advertisements of companies which
live from managing so-called "IP rights".
> > not all the licenses for solaris 9 are the same. do your research first
> > before you suggest I or anyone else is engaging in IP theft.
>
> I'm using Sol 9 commercially. I'm not a student. I'm not exploring it
> for possible inclusion in my world. I'm using it in a business.
> Therefore I have to pay for it and I did. It's the law. If I had not I
^^^^^^^^^^^^
You should decide if you speak about the law (as such) or your personal
contracts/licenses which may even be partially or completely void if
they don't comply to the law as such.
Mixing up those things doesn't do anyone any good.
> would be engaging in IP theft. I didn't say you were engaging in IP
> theft. There is no way I can determine that. What you understood in what
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Neither can we or some lawyer - the only one who "determines" that is
the judge in court.
Could you please stop the false propaganda (from the "pro total IP
business" camp) and all other misleading claims.
[...]
Bernd
--
Firmix Software GmbH http://www.firmix.at/
mobil: +43 664 4416156 fax: +43 1 7890849-55
Embedded Linux Development and Services
_______________________________________________
http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html
