Examining these EULAs is probably won't get anywhere. Macromedia simplified them a lot, but they are still designed to be
prohibitive, beyond what is really necessary. This is to make sure that legal action can be taken, in an extreme case, and to
prevent people escaping through loop-holes.
You should talk to someone at Macromedia directly, who can tell you yes or no, based on exactly what you want to do with the code.
If the EULA says no, there is still room for them to say yes... Mike Chambers should be a good start. He can at least put you in
touch with the right person.
Peter
www.peterjoel.com
www.macromedia.com/go/team/
----- Original Message -----
From: "JesterXL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Open Source Flash Mailing List" <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2005 3:28 AM
Subject: Re: [osflash] redistributing MM classes with MTASC fixes
This has been discussed 10 billion times; the only reason it wasn't resolved
is because anyone who ever resolved a thread that popped up wasn't a
certified laywer that could answer the questions that arose after said post.
Since I'd prefer to keep the world turning, and thus repeat history, *ahem*:
http://www.macromedia.com/software/eula/tools/flash_components.html
That should answer all questions (it hasn't in the past, but repeating just
because I'm good at repitition, too much techno...)
Here is the full license:
http://www.macromedia.com/software/eula/tools/supplemental_license.html
If you are looking for the Material Improvement definition, it's at the
bottom:
"Material Improvement" shall be defined as perceptible, measurable and
definable improvements to the Components Framework or a Component that
provide extended or additional functionality that add significant business
value to the components.
<<<
_______________________________________________
osflash mailing list
[email protected]
http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org
