Dave Crossland wrote: > I heard that this EULA forbids potential Gnash developers in the USA > from contributing if they have ever agreed to it.
Correct, which is why none of the Gnash developers in the US have ever agreed to it. We've known about this since the beginning, and it's successful at keeping many people from contributing to Gnash that would like to. I believe in EU countries, the clause is considered illegal, as it's not valid copyright law. Here in the US it's not really a legit copyright notice either, but it has never been tested in court. Copyright law supposedly can only apply to the copyrighted material being covered, and not extended to "no implementing of similar technology" types of coverage according to the lawyers I've talked to. The player project manager at Adobe once mentioned on her blog last year they were "revisiting their EULA language" to help Adobe be a better player in the free & open source software communities, but I'm not holding my breath waiting. I don't need to use any Adobe products anyway. > Could anyone confirm in this is true, and which clause specifically > has this nasty effect? I believe it was #8. The language is something of the "can't write a flash player if you agree to this" variety. - rob - _______________________________________________ Gnash mailing list Gnash@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnash