Kerry Thompson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> It's not really a gray area, though. When you buy Director, you're really
> buying two things--the development environment, and the rights to
> distribute the runtime. Asking for a stub projector is, in fact, asking for
> a pirated version of the runtime.
Not exactly. If someone sends our correspondent a stub projector, there
has been no breach of the license agreement. That person has merely
'distributed' the runtime to our correspondent.
If our correspondent goes on to *distribute* that stub projector, then
yes, he is pretty much distributing pirate software.
The grey area would be if someone agrees to make a version for the other
platform and also agrees that that version be distributed by this first
fellow.
I'm pretty sure that this eventuality is covered in the license, and I'm
pretty sure there's a legal loophole whereby someone can distribute
someone else's stub, as long as they do what is required of them
(something about filling in a form and sending a copy of the product to
Macromedia - and how many legitimate users do that, eh? Check your 'Made
with Macromedia' folder and weep, folks!).
I've also seen jd on public fora mentioning the possibility that users
may download stubs for the other platform. He often brings this up when
people start complaining about not being able to generate projectors for
both platforms with one copy of Director. He makes these comments as an
official Macromedia representative.
To the best of my knowledge, none of us are lawyers.
I would say it's a bit much to jump on someone for just asking the
question, especially in light of jd's 'official' (if not strictly
legally watertight) advice - why should ignorance of legal matters be
treated with more vitriol than ignorance of lingo.
How many Director licensees have fully digested the runtime distribution
license agreement? Some, for sure, but it must be a minority.
How many Director licensees have (through ignorance, laziness or other
reasons) failed to send a distributed copy of a product which contains
the runtime into Macromedia? All those people have violated the runtime
distribution license.
I fully understand why developers get mad when the spectre of piracy
haunts. For me it's more like knowing that somebody is exceeding the
speed limit in their car. (And nobody on this list does that, right? And
car accidents are far less important than license agreements, right?)
Sure, it's partly your problem, especially if they are driving
dangerously, but what good does it do to use energy on that? Curse them
under your breath and move on.
(I don't drive or have a car ;)
It would be good if questions such as "can anyone send me a stub for
this platform" developed into threads where more of us could have a
better understanding of the complex legal dimensions of runtime
distribution, instead of just screaming 'Warez' and closing the box as
quickly as possible.
It would be good, except this subject is off topic for Lingo-L.
Sorry to go on for so long, Tab.
--
_____________
Brennan Young
Artist, Composer and Multimedia programmer
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"I suppose if I'm honest, I use my penis as a sort of car substitute."
-Stephen Fry
[To remove yourself from this list, or to change to digest mode, go to
http://www.penworks.com/LUJ/lingo-l.cgi To post messages to the list,
email [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Problems, email [EMAIL PROTECTED])
Lingo-L is for learning and helping with programming Lingo. Thanks!]
