This has been an interesting discussion. Two observations I'd like to add to the solera are: 1: This is a nearly identical suit to the one CA filed against Quest two or three years ago just as Quest was gaining momentum in the DB2 space. After the appropriate money got spent on legal fees a settlement was reached; Quest still has better tools. 2: The technology allegedly stolen is now 8 years old unless CA has been derelict in their asset protection activities. What an interesting indictment of CA's investment in the relevant tools that they think that the code they bought 8 years ago is still a viable basis for a current product. That may be why they have had trouble supporting V8 and V9 of DB2. These two releases change the specs on nearly every object in DB2 requiring quite a bit of rewriting. I believe Rocket's stuff supports V8 now. Rocket / IBM's tools have been gaining market share often at CA's expense. In both cases it becomes reasonable to suspect that the director of litigation and the director of marketing may have chatted.
Edward Long ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
