> As previous discussed, the aim is to work /with/ Macromedia - not > against them. I think you are being a little aggressive. It's not a > case of allowing Macromedia to dictate law .. wow what an extreme > viewpoint .. it's a case of allowing Macromedia to define the future of > their own products without us throwing unnecessary spanners in the machine! >
Throwing "unnecessary spanners in the machine" is to some extent what the "victims" of open source often feel is happening. I am sure microsoft feels linux is "unnecessary." I would agree with a more conciliatory tone, were it not for the fact that Mike Chambers comments and legal reference are totally unfounded. It is clear he is not versed in the law on this subject, and I doubt he has contacted internal MM counsel on his references and statement. By making wrong statements here that dampen enthusiasm or create fear, whether purposefully or not, he is engaging in Macromedia FUD. Personally, I dont think this can be stood for. I think people, and companies, should stand up for what they believe in and play it totally straight. Mr Chambers is either not playing it straight, or he is not fully knowledgeable. Either way, it is problematic for people who are primarily technical on this list and are perhaps more succeptible to the big bad wolf warning them to hear such uninformed messages. Regards Hank _______________________________________________ osflash mailing list [email protected] http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org
